9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (5) TMI 630X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 001-02, 2002-03 and 2003-04. As the issues arising in all these appeals are common, for the sake of convenience, they are heard together and disposed of by way of this common order. 2. The facts are brought at paras 2 to 2.2 of the order of the CIT(A) for the assessment year 2002-03. They are extracted hereunder for ready reference : 2. The appellant is a company incorporated in Mauritius. It was engaged in the business of telecasting of TV channels such as B4U Music, MCM etc. For the assessment year 2002-03, relevant to the previous year ended 31 March 2002, the appellant had filed its return of income declaring the total loss at Rs. 24,37,91,548 along with the tax audit report under section 44AB of the Income tax Act, 1961 ("the Act"). ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the parties that the arguments are the same and the decisions taken by the Bench in those cases are applicable to the case on hand. 5. Rival contentions heard. 6. On a careful consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and perusal of the papers on record and case law cited, we hold as follows. 7. ITA No.3829/Mum/2008 is the assessee's appeal filed for asstt. year 2001-02. 8. Ground no. 1 is general in nature. 9. Ground no. 2 is on the issue whether an order u/s. 201 can be passed beyond the period of 4 years from the end of the relevant financial year and hence is not within reasonable time and thus barred by limitation. Admittedly, the issue is covered against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue by the judg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessee. 14. Ground no. 7 is on the issue of deduction of tax on payments made to LMB Holdings Ltd. (Isle of Man). Consistent with the view taken by us while disposing of ground no. 6 for assessment year 2002-03 in ITA No.3326/Mum/2006, we decide this issue in favour of the assessee. 15. Ground no. 8 is on the levy of interest u/s.201(1A). Levy of interest is consequential and requires no separate adjudication. 16. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part. 17. ITA No.4095/Mum/2008 is Revenue's appeal. 18. The sole ground is on the issue of deduction of tax at source on payments made to PanAmSat towards transponder hire charges. While disposing of ground no. 3 in the assessee's appeal in ITA No. 3326/Mum/20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed. 30. ITA No. 3831/Mum/2008 is an appeal by the assessee for assessment year 2003-04. 31. Ground nos. 1 & 2 are general in nature. 32. Ground no. 3 is the same as ground no. 4 for the assessment year 2001-02 in ITA No. 3829/Mum/2008. Consistent with the view taken therein, we decide the issue in favour of the assessee. 33. Ground nos. 4, 5 & 6 are identical to ground nos. 5, 6 & 7 of the assessee appeal in ITA No. 3829/Mum/2008. Consistent with the view taken therein, we allow these grounds of the assessee. 34. Ground no. 7 is on the levy of interest. This is consequential in nature. 35. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part. 36. ITA No.4097/Mum/2008 is Revenue's appeal and the only ground involved is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
