9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (5) TMI 1451X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly decided in favour of the assessee. - ITA No.5277/M/2014 - - - Dated:- 13-5-2016 - SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For the Appellant : Shri Paras Savla, A.R. Ms. Priyanka Gada, A.R. For the Respondent : Shri Rahul Raman, D.R. ORDER Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member: The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 24.06.2013 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter referred to as the CIT(A)] relevant to assessment year 2010-11. 2. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal: 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 10 ('CIT(A)-1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vice tax collected during the year should be a part of the gross receipts for the purpose of the computation of income or the gross receipts are to be taken exclusive of sales tax receipts. The Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred to as the AO) while relying upon the Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) in the case of Siem Offshore Inc reported in (2011) 337 ITR 027 observed that the gross receipts should be taken inclusive of the service tax for the purpose of computation of income of the assessee under section 44B of the Act. While holding so, the AO also relied upon the decision of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of DDIT (International Taxation) vs. Technip Offshore Contracting BE ITA No.4613/Del/2007 vide order dated 16. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5 for A.Y. 2012-13 have also been placed on file. The assessee has also relied upon the decision of the Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of DIT vs. Mitchell Drilling International Pvt. Ltd. (2015) 62 Taxman.com 24 (Delhi). On the other hand, the Ld. D.R. has relied upon the finding of the lower authorities. 6. We have heard the rival contentions and have also gone through the records. We find that the co-ordinate bench of the Tribunal in the own case of the assessee in earlier assessment year A.Y. 2007-08 vide order dated 31.10.12 has observed that the decision of the Delhi Bench of the ITAT in the case of Technip Offshore Contracting BE (supra) has already been considered by the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ded the issue in favour of the Revenue, however, the Hon ble Delhi High Court, which is a higher authority, in the case of DIT vs. Mitchell Drilling International Pvt. Ltd. (supra) has decide the issue in favour of the assessee. The co-ordinate bench of the Tribunal has further observed that since the issue under consideration has already been decided in the own case of the assessee and further that the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Marubeni Corporation vs. DCIT (2014) 44 Taxman.com 22 (Mum.) has held that as a matter of precedent the Tribunal is bound to follow the decision rendered by the Tribunal in the own case of the assessee in earlier year, unless, there is a change in law, change in facts and circumstances of the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
