Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: income tax appellate tribunal itat delhi Year: 2005 Page 1 of about 11 results (0.053 seconds)

Jun 22 2005 (TRI)

Motorola Inc., Erisson Radio Vs. Deputy C.i.T.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Decided on : Jun-22-2005

Reported in : (2005)96TTJ(Delhi)1

..... business opportunities in india for the assessee in relation to its products.further, it is specifically provided inter alia, that the indian counterpart has no role to play as a mediator between the assessee and any indian buyer, it cannot bind the assessee in any manner while promoting its products in india and that the final terms of contract for sale ..... or merchandise on behalf of the assessee. while dealing with the issue of "business connection", we have given a categorical finding that eci has no role to play as a mediator between the assessee and any buyer. it cannot bind the assessee in any manner while promoting its products in india and that the final terms of contract for sale of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 30 2005 (TRI)

Wimco Exports Ltd. Vs. Addl. Cit.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Decided on : Aug-30-2005

Reported in : (2006)5SOT262(Delhi)

this appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the learned commissioner (appeals) dated 28-2-2002 for assessment year 1998-99. in the first ground the assessee is aggrieved against two disallowances, viz. rs. 1,06,500 being expenses incurred in connection with the mutation of property and rs. 46,504 representing cost of pagers each costing less than rs. 5,000.the assessee-company is engaged in the business of trading, export, import and real estate. it had declared a total loss of rs. 1,35,44,542 for the year under consideration. the expenditure of rs. 1,06,500 was incurred for the mutation of the property which was the office building of the assessee. since the assessing officer considered this to be of capital nature, he disallowed the claim of the assessee. before the commissioner (appeals) it was contended that mutation was necessitated only on account of the change in the name of the company and not because the property was duly purchased. however, the commissioner (appeals) concurred with the assessing officer and confirmed the disallowance.the contention of the learned counsel was the same as it was before the commissioner (appeals) and the learned dr relied on the orders of the lower authorities.on due consideration of the matter, we direct the assessing officer to allow the claim of the assessee. it is evident from the record that the property in question was purchased by the assessee long back and the allotment/lease deed was executed on 4-6-1982. the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 21 2005 (TRI)

Pride Foramer S.A. (Formerly Vs. Acit, S.R.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Decided on : Oct-21-2005

Reported in : (2006)98ITD249(Delhi)

1. this is a misc. application filed by the assessee under section 254(2) of the act praying that the order dt. 14.7.05 passed by this tribunal in the aforesaid appeal be recalled and the patent mistakes in the order be rectified.2. before adverting to the various mistakes pointed out in this m.a., in the order of the tribunal, it is necessary for us to give a background of the past history of the appellant. the appellant is a non resident company incorporated in france. it entered into a contract with ongc of india. the appellant as per the agreement was to provide technicians for the exploration of oil and gas offshore india. through the technicians the appellant provide technical services on jack up rigs owned by the ongc. in the a.y. 1984-85 to 1986-87 the question arose as to whether the salary which the appellant pays to the expatriate employees who work on the ongc jack up rigs were chargeable to tax in india and consequently was there an obligation on the part of the appellant to deduct tax at source in the case of boudier christian v. ito 46 itd 114 which was a case of expatriate employee employed with the appellant. the tribunal held that the appellant herein did not have a fixed place of business in india or had any permanent establishment in india. the tribunal also held that the payment which the appellant receives from ongc was in the nature of fees for rendering technical services and was not in the nature of an industry or commercial profits. as a natural .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 27 2005 (TRI)

Arb Inc. Vs. Jcit, Special Range-14

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Decided on : Jan-27-2005

Reported in : (2005)93ITD520(Delhi)

1. the main issue arising in this appeal relates to the applicability of the provisions of section 44bb of income-tax act, 1961 (act).2. briefly stated the facts are these: the assessee is a foreign company having its head office in usa. during the financial year 1995-96, it had received a contract from gas authority of india ltd. (gail) for laying of pipelines through horizontal directional drilling across the chambal and the yamuna river. the total contractual receipts in the year under consideration amounted to rs. 12,98,22,970/-. by invoking the provisions of section 44bb, the assessee offered the net income at rs. 1,29,82,297/- by applying the presumptive rate of 10% of the total receipts. the assessee was asked to explain as to how the provisions of section 44bb were applicable to the present case. the explanation of the assessee before the ao was (i) that the pipelines laid by the assessee was to be used for the purpose of transportation of natural gas which falls within the meaning of 'mineral oil' for the purpose of section 44bb (ii) that gail was processing the natural gas to produce lpg, propane, pentane etc. and thus, it was engaged in the business of production of mineral oils. thus, it was submitted that the assessee was covered by the provisions of section 44bb as it was providing services to gail which was engaged in the business of production of mineral oil. the assessee also relied on the definition of natural gas as provided in the petroleum tax guide, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 31 2005 (TRI)

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Royal Jordanians Airlines

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Decided on : Aug-31-2005

Reported in : (2006)283ITR28(Delhi)

1. these four appeals pertain to asst. yrs. 1995-96, 1994-95, 1996-97 and 2000-2001. appeal in ita no. 5252/del/1998 is revenue's appeal filed on 3rd nov., 1998 against the order of the learned cit(a) xvi, new delhi dt. 4th aug., 1998 in the case of the assessee in relation to assessment order under section 143(3) for asst. yr. 1995-96. appeal in ita no. 3805/del/1999 is the appeal filed by the assessee on 24th sept., 1999 against the order of the learned cit(a)-vi, new delhi dt.4th june, 1999 in the case of the assessee in relation to assessment order under section 143(3) for asst. yr. 1994-95. appeal in ita no.1786/del/2000 is the appeal filed by the revenue on 10th april, 2000 against the order of the learned cit(a)-xvi, new delhi, dt. 17th jan., 2000 in the case of the assessee in relation to assessment order under section 143(3) for asst. yr. 1996-97, and the appeal in ita no.4670/del/2003 is the appeal filed by the assessee on 14th oct., 2003 against the order of the learned cit(a)-xxix, new delhi, dt. 29th sept., 2003 in the case of the assessee in relation to assessment order under section 143(3) for asst. yr. 2000-01.2. these four appeals have been assigned to us for disposal by the order of the hon'ble president, tribunal. we may briefly trace the sequence of events leading to these four appeals being assigned to us as a special bench. the issue involved in these appeals mainly is whether the appellant/respondent royal jordanian airlines (hereinafter referred to as .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 02 2005 (TRI)

National Panasonic India (P) Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Ta ...

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Decided on : Feb-02-2005

Reported in : (2005)94TTJ(Delhi)899

1. the assessee is in appeal before us against the order of the learned cit(a), dt. 28th jan., 2004, for financial year 2001-02. the assessee is aggrieved against the invoking, the provisions of sections 194-i and 194h of the it act, 1961 (the act), and thereby confirming the order passed under section 201/201a(1a) of the act. we first take up the issue relating to the applicability of section 194-i.2. the assessee is a subsidiary of matsushita electric company, japan, and operates through two divisions, viz., (a) consumer product division and (b) system product division. it has twelve branches all over india and also has a network of distributors and dealers. in the course of verification of form nos. 26-c and 26-j, the ao, on a sample basis, analyzed the agreement between the assessee and ankur roadlines (p) ltd. (ankur for short), one of the clearing and forwarding agents (c&f agent for short) of the assessee-company. the findings of the ao were as follows : (a) clauses 4 to 12 of the agreement concentrated on the physical space provided to the assessee which, according to the ao, was the main ingredient of the agreement; (b) as per clauses 8 and 9 of the agreement, it was not an outright sale to the agent but the property in the goods remained with the assessee; (c) as per clause 11 of the agreement, the assessee had free access to the property at all times and had powers to inspect the goods, to make inventory, to take charge of and remove the goods without any .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 20 2005 (TRI)

Dhiraj Suri Vs. Addl. Cit

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Decided on : Apr-20-2005

this appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the commissioner (appeals) by which he confirmed the penalty of rs. 6,51,982 imposed under section 158bfa(2) of the income tax act.the appeal arises this way. there was a search of the assessee's premises on 7-8-1997. pursuant to the search, the assessing officer called upon the assessee to file the return of income. in response thereto, the assessee filled the block return on 18-8-1999 declaring undisclosed income of rs. 7.5 lakhs. he completed the block assessment on 31-8-1999, determining the undisclosed income at rs. 11,42,796.there was an appeal by the assessee against certain additions other than the surrendered amount of rs. 7.5 lakhs as a result of which the total undisclosed income was reduced to rs. 10,86,637. there was no further appeal by either side. after competing the block assessment, the assessing officer initiated penalty proceedings under section 158bfa(2) of the act. the assessee submitted by way of explanation that she had filed the return of income on the basis of incomplete records and in the block return, she had declared undisclosed income of rs. 7.5 lakhs with the remark that she may be permitted to revise the same and that the disclosed amount would not be taken as a guiding factor for levying the penalty. she also explained that return was filed under a disadvantage, in that, she did not have all the copies of the seized material with her. it was, therefore, submitted that penalty .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 20 2005 (TRI)

Shri Dhiraj Suri Vs. Addl. Cit, Sr-1

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Decided on : Apr-20-2005

Reported in : (2006)98ITD187(Delhi)

1. this appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the cit(a) by which he confirmed the penalty of rs. 6,51,982 imposed under section 158bfa(2) of the income-tax act.2. the appeal arises this way. there was a search of the assessee's premises on 7.8.87. pursuant to the search, the ao called upon the assessee to file the return of income. in response thereto, the assessee filed the block return on 18.8.99 declaring undisclosed income of rs. 7.5 lacs. he completed the block assessment on 31.8.99, determining the undisclosed income at rs. l1,42,796. there was an appeal by the assessee against certain additions other than the surrendered amount of rs. 7.5 lacs as a result of which the total undisclosed income was reduced to rs. 10,86,637. there was no further appeal by either side. after competing the block assessment, the ao initiated penalty proceedings under section 158bfa(2) of the act. the assessee submitted by way of explanation that she had filed the return of income on the basis of incomplete records and in the block return, she had declared undisclosed income of rs. 7.5 lacs with the remark that she may be permitted to revise the same and that the disclosed amount would not be taken as a guiding factor for levying the penalty.she also explained that return was filed under a disadvantage, in that, she did not have all the copies of the seized material with her. it was, therefore, submitted that penalty proceedings may not be pursued.the ac), however, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 27 2005 (TRI)

Supreme Collections (i) (P) Ltd. Vs. Dy. Cit

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Decided on : Jun-27-2005

Reported in : (2006)7SOT91(Delhi)

the assessee has filed this appeal against the order of the commissioner of income tax (appeals) passed in appeal no. 87/2003-04, dated 9-7-2004 on the following effective ground : "that on facts and in the circumstances of the case the learned commissioner of income tax (appeals) erred in confirming the disallowance of rs. 2,51,725 on account of commission paid to multiple web solutions private limited." briefly stated the facts relating to the issue involved in this ground of appeal of the assessee are that the assessee has claimed payment of commission of rs. 2,51,725 to m/s. multiple web solutions (p) ltd. @ 3 per cent on the sales amounting to rs. 83,90,835. the assessing officer on persistent queries to the assessee and on examination of details found that this payment was not in fact a payment for commission, but was a payment for advertisement of the product of the assessee on the website of this company. he also noticed that through this so-called advertisement on the website not a single sale was affected by the assessee. he further noticed that even a single query through e-mail or otherwise regarding the sale/purchase of the products traded by the assessee-company was received by the assessee. there was no written agreement or understanding between the assessee-company and the website advertiser. thereafter the assessing officer observed that the assessee has not been able to establish any nexus between the sales and the payment of so-called commission to m/s. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 29 2005 (TRI)

Ongc Ltd. Cpf Trust Vs. Income Tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Decided on : Jun-29-2005

Reported in : (2005)98TTJ(Delhi)1111

1. these four appeals are directed against the orders of the cit(a), dt. 30th sept., 2002 pertaining to financial years 1997-98 to 2000-01.the grounds of appeal, which are common in all the four years, read as follows : "1. that the learned cit(a)-ii, dehradun, has erred both on facts and in law in confirming the order made under sections 201 and 201(1a) of the it act. 2. the cit(a) has erred in holding that the assessee-trust was obliged in law to have deducted the tax at source, in respect of employees of ongc who had since retired but admittedly remained its members. 3. that the cit(a) has completely overlooked the factual substratum of the case as also the detailed written submissions furnished by the assessee, dt. 19th sept., 2002 and further submissions dt. 20th sept., 2002, wherein it was explained in detail that there are no income chargeable to tax had accrued to the members of the trust and as such sum being outside the scope of total income, there was no obligation to deduct the tax at source. 4. that the cit(a) has further overlooked that the amounts of interest credited by the appellant in respect of the balances outstanding to the account of retired employees of m/s ongc was not in the nature of income and as such, the provisions of section 194a of the it act could not be invoked so as to conclude that the assessee had credited any income by way of interest to such of the accounts of the retired employees of m/s ongc. it is, therefore, prayed that it be held .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //