Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: income tax appellate tribunal itat pune Year: 2005 Page 1 of about 3 results (0.081 seconds)

Oct 05 2005 (TRI)

Coca Cola India Ltd. Vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Pune

Decided on : Oct-05-2005

Reported in : (2006)102ITD134(Pune.)

..... bottlers. the damages are worked out on the basis of excess production of 2,80,000 crates. we have already seen that the assessee had been acting a sort of mediator between the supreme and its bottlers regarding lifting of crates and the quality of crates, respectively. it was thought fit, by way of commercial expediency to compensate the supreme for ..... to source the crates from the supreme.for this purpose, various bottlers entered into separate agreements with the supreme. it also appears that the assessee acted as a kind of mediator between the supreme and the bottlers in respect of purchase of crates and payment on the one side and the quality of crates on the other side. the assessee decided ..... likely to devolve upon the assessee as it was of no consequence in money terms. it was also pointed out by him that the assessee was acting merely as a mediator between the supplier on the one hand and the bottlers on the other hand and the bottlers were not satisfactorily discharging their liabilities, as shown from the follow-up of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 30 2005 (TRI)

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Finolex Pipes Ltd.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Pune

Decided on : Nov-30-2005

Reported in : (2007)106TTJ(Pune.)741

1. all these three appeals have been filed by the revenue out of which two are against a consolidated order of cit(a), dt. 15th march, 1993, and the third one is against an order of cit(a), dt. 16th feb., 1994.these appeals have been filed against an order under section 195 of the it act. since the issue raised in these appeals is common, therefore, consolidated, heard together and hereby decided by this common order.identical grounds have been raised and the substantial ground is ground no. 1 in all these appeals reproduced below. on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned cit(a) has erred in holding that the process design documentation fees paid to the assessee's collaborator company was part and parcel of plant and not royalty.2. the facts leading to these appeals were that an order under section 195 was passed by the dy. cit dt. 5th sept., 1990, wherein it was mentioned that the assessee has applied for a "no objection certificate" in connection with remittance of 2nd instalment of technical know-how and design engineering fees to its german collaborator, viz. uhde gmbh, west germany. the said instalment was in respect of remittable amount of dm 26,66,667. the contention of the assessee before the ao was that the said payment did not fall within the meaning of the term "royalty". it was stated that the payment of design engineering fees was not within the definition of "royalty" as contemplated in double taxation avoidance treaty (dtat) with west .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 30 2005 (TRI)

Smt. Krishnabai Tingre Vs. Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Pune

Decided on : Jun-30-2005

Reported in : (2006)101ITD317(Pune.)

1. this is an appeal by the assessee arising out of the order of learned cit(a)-in, pune, dated 15-4-1998 and several grounds have been raised which arc argumentative and stated to be either alternative grounds or consequential in nature. before us, the learned ar mr. n.c.khandelwal has stressed upon ground no. 1 which reads as follows: on facts and circumstances prevailing in the case and as per provisions of law, it be held that the value of the property as on 1-4-1981 should have been taken at rs. 4,61,000 as is adopted by the appellant. it may further be held that the reference made by the assessing officer is erroneous on facts and circumstances prevailing in the case is contrary to the scheme of the act and is beyond his jurisdiction. it may further be held that assessing officer should have accepted the value adopted by the appellant and should have disregarded the value ascertained by the valuation officer as per the provisions of the act and as per the scheme of the act. just and per relief be granted to the appellant in this respect.2. the facts of the case in brief are that the assessee has declared capital gain arising on transfer of land admeasuring 7093.42 sq.m.situated at survey no. 14, wadgaon sheri. the value of this land as on 1-4-1981 was worked out at rs. 4,61,000 on the basis of valuation report of approved valuer. the basic issue before us is in respect of the valuation determined as on 1-4-1981 by an approved valuer. the assessing officer has observed .....

Tag this Judgment!


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