Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Blue Star Infotech Ltd. Versus ACIT, 6 (1) , Mumbai.

2015 (6) TMI 164 - ITAT MUMBAI

Mistake rectifiable u/s 154 - order u/s 154 read with section 143(3) and 250 withdrawing the claim for credit of foreign TDS - period of limitation - Held that:- In the instant case, the assessee has sought for rectification in the order u/s 143(3) passed by the A.O. on 26-12- 2008 which is within the period of 4 years from the end of the financial year in which the assessment order was passed. Accordingly we hold that the application u/s 154 of the Act was within the time limit laid down u/s 15 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t. Prior to the amendment by Finance Act 2000, the Act provided that any profits and gains to which the provisions of section 10A apply “shall not be included in the total income of the assessee”. However, after the amendment w.e.f. A.Y. 2001-02 the profits and gains to which the provisions of section 10A apply are not excluded from total income and instead “a deduction of such profits and gains…..” shall be allowed from the total income of the assessee”. It means “total income” must first be de .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

India and Japan as applicable to the assessment years under consideration. Since here we are concerned with the treatment to be given to the resident of India in relation to taxes paid in Japan., the same is covered by Paragraph 2 of Article 23 and not by paragraph 3 of Article 23 which provides for treatment to be given in relation to taxes paid in India by resident of Japan.

On the one hand the assessee is being discriminated against a resident of Japan to whom the incentive of sect .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

on also of Article 24 of Double Taxation Avoidance Convention between India and Japan. Thus we direct the A.O. to allow credit for foreign TDS against the tax levied on the corresponding income eligible for deduction u/s 10B of the Act in India for all the three years under consideration i.e. assessment years 2003-04, 2004-05 and 2005-06. - I .T.A. No.5750/Mum/2010, I .T.A. No.5751/Mum/2010, I .T.A. No.8705/Mum/2011 - Dated:- 17-4-2015 - SHRI R.C. SHARMA AND SHRI VIVEK VARMA, JJ. For The Appella .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e order passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under section 154 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (the Act), for the A Y 2003-04. 2. The ld CIT(A) erred in reckoning the time limit under section 154(7) of the Act, from the date of Intimation under section 143(1)(a) of the Act, dt. 12.3.2004, because the aforesaid Intimation cannot be treated as an "order" as contemplated under section 154 of the Act. 3. The ld CIT(A) erred in not reckoning the time limit from the date of order under section 1 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

lant before the AO as a request of the AO in his letter dt. 29.4.2008. 6. The Id CIT(A) erred in holding the claim of the appellant in respect of credit for foreign TDS as a debatable issue, when this issue had never been touched or dealt with by the AO. 7. The Id CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that as per section 199 of the Act, any TDS shall be treated as a payment of tax on behalf of the taxdeductee, viz. the appellant in the present case and the AO is dutybound to consider the claim for cr .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ed in not taking into consideration the fact that the aforesaid order under section 154 of the Act, was passed by the AO in view of a Grievances Petition filed by the appellant before the CIT-6, Mumbai, vide letter dt.29.12.2007. 3. The Id. CIT(A) erred in not taking into consideration the fact that the impugned application under section 154 was filed by the appellant before the AO as a request of the AO in his letter, dt. 29.4.2008. 4. The ld CIT(A) erred in holding the claim of the appellant i .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

for foreign TDS. 7. The Id CIT(A) grossly erred in deciding the aforesaid appeal on the basis of the facts for the A Y 2003-04 and not the facts for the current A Y, 2004-05. 8. All the aforesaid Grounds of Appeal are without prejudice to one another. 4. The grounds raised by the assessee in A.Y. 2005-06 read as under:- 1. The learned (ld) CIT(A)-14, Mumbai, erred in upholding the order passed by the Assessing Officer (AO), under section 154 of the Income- Tax Act, 1961 (the Act), for the A.Y. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ns made by the appellant, in support of its claim regarding credit for foreign TDS, by simply stating the fact that such a claim was not allowed by the CIT(A) for the AY 2004-05. 5. The ld CIT(A) failed to appreciate that there were two different issues involved in the appeal before him, the one, whether the issue under consideration was a debatable one and the other, whether on merits, the appellant was entitled to the credit in respect of foreign TDS. 6. The ld CIT(A) failed to appreciate that .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s, the assessee is aggrieved for not giving credit of tax deducted at Japan in respect of its income which had also brought in the tax net in India. The assessee is also aggrieved by the action of the lower authorities for holding that there was no mistake in the order passed u/s 143(1) and 143(3) of the Act for assessment years 2003-04 and 2004-05 insofar as there was an omission on the part of the A.O. to consider and make order on the assessee s claim of deduction of foreign tax made in the r .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t for the foreign tax while issuing demand notice. Similarly, return of income for A.Y. 2004-05 was filed on 30-10-2004 wherein credit for foreign tax of ₹ 2,47,21,726/- was claimed. TDS Certificates were filed on 12-01-2005 which was misplaced by the A.O. and therefore, subsequently photo copies were filed. The A.O. passed the assessment order u/s 143(3) of the Act on 20-12- 2006 without giving any credit for foreign tax. Since in both the assessment years there was omission on the part o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d accordingly there was an apparent mistake in the order which is liable for rectification u/s 154 of the Act. 8. With regard to the merit of the assessee s claim, he contended that the income of the assessee was not exempt u/s 10A of the Act insofar as there was amendment by the Finance Act, 2000, w.e.f. 01-04-2001. As per the ld. A.R. w.e.f. A.Y. 2001-02, the profits and gains to which the provisions of section 10A apply were not excluded from total income and instead a deduction of such profi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ands is not a provision in the nature of an exemption but provides for a deduction . 9. The ld. A.R. further highlighted the following observations of the Hon ble Bombay High Court negating the contention on the ground that section 10B was not a provision in the nature of an exemption but only provided for a deduction:- 'The AO was plainly in error in proceeding on the basis that because the income is exempted, the loss was not allowable. All the four units of the assessee were eligible unde .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the judgment of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of ITO & Anr. V. Stumpp, Schedule & Somappa (P) Ltd. (1997) 106 ITR 399 (Kar) wherein it was held that a deduction does not mean that corresponding income has not been charged to tax. In the words of Hon'ble High Court: ''The heading of Chapter III of the IT Act is "Incomes which do not form part of total income." Chapter IV deals with the computation of total income. It classifies the income under differe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ts by an assessee. Receipts are classified as capital or revenue, and receipts of revenue nature are treated as income. Capital receipts except in so far as they are liable for capital gains, and deemed to be income for that purpose, are not treated as income. Sec. 2(9) of the Act provides that the words and expressions used in the Act but not defined in it and defined in the IT Act shall have the meanings respectively assigned to them in that Act (IT Act - Therefore, when r. 4 of the Second Sch .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Court (supra). In that case deduction was under Chapter VI-A which provides for deduction in the course of computation of total income. The heading of Chapter VI-A is "Deductions to be made in computing total income" whereas deduction u/s. 10A with effect from assessment year 2001-02 is from total income i.e. after computation of income chargeable to tax is complete. 12. The ld. A.R. heavily relied on the decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. Azadi Bachao A .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d in so far as the particular item under consideration is concerned. 13. At Para 70 of the judgment Hon'ble Supreme Court quoted from the commentary of Phillip Baker on Article 4 of the DECD Double Tax Convention: "It seems clear that a person does not have to be actually paying tax to be "liable to tax" - otherwise a person who had deductible losses or allowances, which reduced his tax bill to zero would find himself unable to enjoy the benefits of the convention. It also see .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ion can arise only when tax is actually paid in one of the Contracting States." 14. The judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Azadi Bachao Andolan (supra) has been followed by ITAT Bangalore in the case of Wipro Ltd. v. DCIT (2005) 96 ITJ (Bang) 211. Wipro Limited, like the assessee herein, enjoyed in India exemption/ deduction u/s. 10A/80HHE of the Act. The question arose whether Wipro was eligible for tax credit of the income tax it paid in United States of America. The Tri .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Act, 1961 of India. This position is clear from Paragraph 3c. of Article 23 of the Convention. This Sub-Para in relation to the assessment years under consideration reads as under: "c. For the purposes of the credit referred to in sub-paragraphs (a) and (b) above, there shall be deemed to have been paid by the taxpayer the amount which would have been paid as Indian tax under the laws of India and in accordance with this Convention if the Indian tax had not been reduced or relieved in accor .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

bove quoted Article has been made explicit by the exchange of letter between Government of India and Government of Japan as would be seen from the letter dated 07.03.1989 addressed to Mr. Fijiro Noda, ambassador of Japan to India by Mr. G.N. Gupta, Chairman CBDT and replied on the same date by Mr. Fijiro Noda to Mr. G. N. Gupta. This correspondence is placed at page 51 to 53 of the assessee s compilation. 17. As per the ld. A.R. it should be treated to have paid tax in India without giving effec .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ible under the same conditions as if they had been paid to a resident of the first-mentioned Contracting State." As per the ld. A.R. Article 24 of the Convention envisages parity of tax liability between the residents of India and Japan. By virtue of Paragraph 3c of Article 23 the resident of Japan obtains tax relief as if the Indian tax has not been reduced by the provisions of section 10A. On the same logic the tax relief to the resident of India should be calculated as if the Indian tax .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ents are taken into account by the recipients in computation of their income, and taxes in respect of such income are duly paid and related income tax returns are duly filed by the resident recipients under section 139(1). However, as section 40(a)(i) does not have an exclusion clause similar to second proviso to Section 40(a)(ia), so far as payments made to nonresidents, without deduction of applicable tax deduction at source, are concerned, such payments will be disallowable even in a situatio .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

on of deductibility in respect of a similar payment, i.e. without deduction of tax at source, made to a resident Indian taxpayer. To this extent, in the light of the legal position prevailing as on now and as there is no binding judicial precedent contrary to coordinate bench decision in the case of Rajeev Kumar Agarwal (supra), there is indeed an element of discrimination, in terms of Article 24(3) of the India Japan DTAA, in the deductibility of payments made to resident entities vis-a-vis non .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

foreign tax is governed by Article 23 of India Japan DTAA, wherein Article 23(2) provides that the deduction will not exceed that part of the income tax which is attributable to the income which may be taxed in Japan. As per the ld. D.R., it is clear from Article 23(2) that deduction shall not exceed that part of the income tax which is attributable to the income which is taxed in Japan. He further contended that when it comes to allowing the deduction, what is relevant is not the income attribu .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the judicial pronouncements cited at bar by the ld. A.R. and ld. D.R. in the context of factual matrix of the case. From the record we found that in the return of income filed for A.Y. 2003-04, the assessee has claimed credit of foreign tax paid amounting to ₹ 4,49,911/-. However, along with the return of income TDS documents of ₹ 43,12,672/- were enclosed. The A.O. did not make any discussion with regard to the tax deducted at Japan for which credit was claimed by the assessee in t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

8 and accordingly the assessee filed application u/s 154 of the Act on 29-4-2008. The A.O. passed order u/s 154 of the Act on 29-7-2008 wherein credit for foreign tax was declined firstly on the plea that the application filed u/s 154 on 29-4-2008 was after expiry of 4 years from the end of financial year 2003-04 and even otherwise it was a debatable issue that could not be considered as mistake rectifiable u/s 154 of the Act. 22. The assessee approached to the ld. CIT(A) and ld. CIT(A) in his o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

en in the intimation issued u/s 143(1) which was passed on 12-03-2004. Thus the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of A.O. to the effect that rectification application filed by the assessee on 29-4-2008 was beyond the time limit from the date of order passed u/s 143(1) of the Act. Even on merit, the ld. CIT(A) held that income which was taxed in Japan has not been taxed in India, therefore, there was no double taxation and the question of DTAA did not arise. 23. For A.Y. 2004-05, the assessee filed .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

.O. the assessee filed application u/s 154 of the Act on 29-4-2008. Order u/s 154 of the Act was passed by the A.O. on 29-7-2008 wherein he observed that the claim of foreign tax made by the assessee was a debatable issue, hence, it was not a mistake rectifiable u/s 154 of the Act. In an appeal filed before the ld. CIT(A), the ld. CIT(A) vide his order dated 20-5-2010, following the same reasoning given in A.Y. 2003-04, dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. 24. The return for A.Y. 2005-06 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Act dated 3-6-2010 withdrawing the claim for credit of foreign TDS. The A.O. further observed that no tax was attributable in India based on Article 23 of DTAA between India and Japan meaning thereby income on which tax has been paid in Japan was exempted under Chapter III of the Act and it did not form part of total income of the assessee. 25. In an appeal filed before the ld. CIT(A), the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of the A.O. by observing that in the assessment year 2004-05 the assessee w .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rvation for A.Y. 2003- 04 to the effect that assessee s application filed u/s 154 was barred by limitation, we found that the A.O. has reckoned the period of 4 years from the last day of financial year 2003-04 which is without any basis or support from the provisions of section 154 of the Act. However, the ld. CIT(A) has reckoned the period of 4 years from the date of intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act which intimation was undated. However, in the instant case, the assessee has sought for rectific .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

under the provision of section 10A of the Act and therefore assessee was not eligible to claim credit for the tax deducted in Japan. This view of the lower authorities are not in consonance with the provisions of section 10A as amended by Finance Act 2000 w.e.f. 1-4-2001 and do not take into account the sea change made in the provision after the aforesaid amendment. Prior to the amendment by Finance Act 2000, the Act provided that any profits and gains to which the provisions of section 10A appl .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n 2(45) of the Act as meaning the total amount of income computed in the manner laid down in this Act. The provisions of section 4 of the Act which is the charging section postulates that income tax shall be charged for any assessment year at the rates prescribed for that year in respect of the total income of the previous year of every person. As we have seen the effect of section 10A is to allow a deduction from 'total income'. How can it be said that the profits and gains to which sec .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ture of an exemption but provides for a deduction." 28. In the case of Hindustan Unilever Limited vs. DCIT 325 ITR 302 (Bom) the assessee had 4 units eligible u/s. 10B. The assessee made profit in 3 units and loss in 1 unit. According to Assessing Officer since the income of the unit was exempt from taxation, the loss of the unit could not have been set off against the normal business income. Negating this contention on the ground that section 10B was not a provision in the nature of an exe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

le the loss sustained by the fourth unit could be set off against the normal business income. In these circumstances, the basis on which the assessment is sought to be reopened is contrary to the plain language of s. 10B." 29. ITAT, Mumbai In the case of Capegemini India (P) Ltd. vs. Addl. CIT (2011) 141 TTJ (Mumbai) (UO) 33 by following the above judgment of Hon ble Bombay High Court held that loss from section 10A unit cannot be adjusted against the profits of other section 10A units and .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

amp; Somappa (P) Ltd. (supra) held that proceeds on the basis that a deduction does not alter the basic fact that the gross amount has been charged to tax. Accordingly Hon'ble Karnataka High Court further observes: "If the contention for the appellants is to be accepted as correct then even) kind of deduction or allowance for expenses made in the computation of the total income under the IT Act would have to be treated as income not includible in the total income ... " 31. The deci .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tax is a fiscal fact. For the purpose of application of Art. 4 of the DTAC, what is relevant is the legal situation, namely, liability to taxation, and not the fiscal fact of actual payment of tax." 32. It is clear from the above discussion that after amendment by Finance Act, 2000 w.e.f. 1-4-2001 deduction u/s 10A being from the total income leads to the conclusion that there is charge of income tax in India also on the income that has been subjected to tax in Japan. The tax liability of t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

given in relation to taxes paid in India by resident of Japan. In this respect the decision of ITAT Delhi in the case of Mitsubishi Corporation India Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT ITA No. 5042/Del/2011 pronounced on 21.10.2014 clinches the issue. In that case the assessee Mitsubishi Corporation India Pvt. Ltd (MCI) was assessed to tax in India as a company resident in India. It was wholly owned subsidiary of Mitsubishi Corporation Japan (MCJ) who too was assessed to tax in India on account of PE in India bu .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ees payment of taxes the deductor assessee is deemed to have deducted and paid the tax on such sums. Revenue argued that the relevant amendment had been made in the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) but there was no similar amendment in the provisions of section 40(a)(i) applicable to the payments made to non-residents. In this manner the Revenue argued that MCI was not protected against the mischief of section 40(a)(i) and the payments made to MCJ were liable to be disallowed for non-deduction of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

cle 24(3), nondiscrimination against capital held by the residents of the other Contracting State i.e. under Article 24(4). It is not at all necessary that the assessees, in whose cases this non-discrimination is invoked, should be resident of, or even a national of, the other contracting state. In this view of the matter, we are unable to accept the plea of Mr. Kapila that since assessee before us is not resident of the other contracting state, the assessee cannot seek treaty protection against .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rimination protection is being invoked in respect of the payments made to a tax resident of treaty partner country, i.e. Japan in this case. What is being sought by the assessee in the present case is deduction neutrality so far as payments made to the resident tax payers in India vis-a-vis payments made to non-residents fiscally domiciled in Japan are concerned. The treaty protection is thus being sought in respect of the Japanese tax residents even though it does affect deductibility of paymen .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version