TMI Blog2008 (1) TMI 179X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... court was delivered by DEEPAK VERMA J.— 1. Heard Sri K. S. Ravishankar, learned counsel for the appellant, and Sri M. V. Seshachala, learned counsel for the respondent. 2. This appeal under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter shall be referred to in short as "the Act"), has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated December 20, 2002, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench "A", in the assessee's I. T. A. No. 402 (Bang)/2002 for the assessment year 1999-2000. In the memo of appeal even though several substantial questions of law have been formulated, but after having heard learned counsel for the parties, learned counsel for the appellant agreed that in fact questions Nos. 33 and 3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... use 4(1) in respect of use of know-how and technical assistance, equal to an amount of 3 per cent. of the net sale price. The royalty payment by the assessee to NTPL was to be made on or before the last day of the month immediately following the royalty period. The royalty was to be paid from the end of March 31, 1993, and each succeeding six months period thereafter during the term ending on March 31 or September 30, as the case may be. The said royalty payable by the assessee to the collaborator was subject to the provisions of tax deduction at source, as per the various provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessee credited the royalty as per the agreed terms to the collaborator from April 1, 1994, to January 31, 2000. The asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e was a short deduction of tax. The Assessing Officer rejected the contention of the assessee. Subsequently the said order of the Assessing Officer was corrected invoking the jurisdiction conferred on him under section 154 of the Act. However, while doing so, the Assessing Officer recomputed the short deduction and interest under section 201(1A) separately for each impugned assessment years. Against the said order, the assessee preferred appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), but the appeal also met the fate of dismissal, which gave rise to the assessee to prefer further appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal also came to the conclusion that no case was made out for any interference and dismissed the appeal. Hence, this further appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ance of double taxation, then, in relation to the assessee to whom such agreement applies, the provisions of this Act shall apply to the extent they are more beneficial to that assessee." 5. Learned counsel appearing for the Revenue strenuously contended that the record would show that the assessee had not raised all these questions either before the Assessing Officer or in the appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) or before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, thus cannot be allowed to raise the same at this stage. 6. Be that as it may, since according to us all these questions are pure questions of law, which are required to be considered but could not be considered even assuming may be due to the fault of the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
