TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 215X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch income is rendered infructuous and accordingly, the Ground raised by the assessee is dismissed as infructuous. In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed. - ITA NOS. 293 And 294/MUM/2017 And ITA NOS. 349 TO 352/MUM/2017 - - - Dated:- 31-8-2018 - SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER For The Assessee : Shri Nitesh Joshi For The Revenue : Shri Himanshu Sharma ORDER PER G.S. PANNU, AM : These are a group of six appeals pertaining to the same assessee for different years and involve common issues, therefore, they have been clubbed and heard together and a consolidated order is being passed for the sake of convenience and brevity. 2. We may first take up the ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ich clearly states the conditions restricting relief under Article 13, when changing the head of income from Income from Other Sources to Capital gains ? 4. Without prejudice to the above, whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in mechanically following ITAT's order in the case of Citicorp Banking Corporation, Bahrain, without appreciating that the Indo-Singapore Treaty contains benefit restricting Article of 24, which is clearly absent in the case of Citicorp Banking Corporation, Bahrain? 5. The Appellant prays that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on the above grounds be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer restored. 4. Although the Revenue has raised multiple Grounds ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) was accepted by the Assessing Officer. However, with regard to the gain on cancellation or pre-determination of forward exchange contracts amounting to ₹ 6,81,22,500/- was concerned, the Assessing Officer did not accept the claim of the assessee. The Assessing Officer treated such gain as taxable under the head Income from Other Sources and accordingly, the same was subjected to tax @ 40%. 6. When the matter reached the CIT(A), the orders of the Tribunal in assessee s own case for Assessment Years 1998-99 and 2005-06 vide ITA Nos. 2877/Mum/2003 and 910/Mum/2009 dated 08.06.2011 was relied upon whereby the income arising on early settlement of forward exchange contracts was held to be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... esaid aspect of the matter was not specifically addressed by the Tribunal in Assessment Years 1998-99 and 2005-06, so however, in an appeal preferred by the assessee for Assessment Year 2010-11, vide order dated 24.03.2017, such an aspect has been specifically addressed against the Revenue. In this context, he referred to the specific Ground raised by the assessee, namely, Ground no. (ii) in the appeal for Assessment Year 2010-11, a copy of which has been placed in the Paper Book. The Tribunal after considering the relevant aspects of the matter, held that the benefits of Article 13(4) of the India-Singapore DTAA could not be denied on account of limitation prescribed under Article 24 of the DTAA. Therefore, in this view of the matter, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ised return of income filed by the appellant and not the amount of ₹ 68,122,500 disclosed in the original return of income. b) Other relief deemed necessary may please be granted. 12. As a perusal of the aforesaid Ground reveals, the dispute revolves around quantification of the income declared on account of earlier settlement of forward exchange contracts as disclosed in the revised return of income vis-a-vis the amount disclosed in the original return of income. 13. At the time of hearing, the learned representative for the assessee pointed out that once the income in question is held to be exempt and not taxable, the aspect raised in this appeal pertaining to quantification of such income becomes academic in nature. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
