THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -1 vs. BENTLY NAVEDA LLC

PDF · subscribers
ITA/1167/2018HC DelhiDLHC01072109201826 October 2018Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The Delhi High Court disposed of the appeal. The Court noted that the issue of levy of interest under Section 234B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was decided against the Revenue in the case of 'Director of Income Tax (International Taxation) vs. GE Packaged Power Inc.', (2015) 373 ITR 65 (Delhi). The Court acknowledged that an appeal against this decision was pending before the Supreme Court and that the ruling of the Supreme Court would apply to the present appeal. Consequently, the appeal was disposed of in terms of the parties' agreement to follow the outcome of the Supreme Court's decision. The Court also stated that if any difficulty arose after the Supreme Court's decision, parties could file an application in the present appeal. The appeal was treated as disposed of for registry purposes.

What were the facts?

The Commissioner of Income Tax - International Taxation -1 (Revenue) filed an appeal before the Delhi High Court challenging an order related to the assessment of Bently Nevada LLC (Assessee). The appeal concerns the levy of interest under Section 234B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The parties agreed that the present appeal could be disposed of in terms of a previous order in ITA No. 661/2018, The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-1 (International Taxation) vs. General Electric Power Systems INC., citing Sections 158A and 158AA of the Act, though acknowledging their strict inapplicability. The Revenue acknowledged that the issue of interest under Section 234B was decided against them in the case of 'Director of Income Tax (International Taxation) vs. GE Packaged Power Inc.', (2015) 373 ITR 65 (Delhi). An appeal against this decision was pending before the Supreme Court.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the levy of interest under Section 234B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is sustainable in the facts and circumstances of the case. The Revenue contended that the issue of levy of interest under Section 234B is covered against them by the Delhi High Court's judgment in 'Director of Income Tax (International Taxation) vs. GE Packaged Power Inc.', (2015) 373 ITR 65 (Delhi). They noted that an appeal against this judgment was pending before the Supreme Court. The Assessee did not present separate arguments but agreed to dispose of the appeal in terms of the aforementioned ruling and the previous order in ITA No. 661/2018.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 234B,Section 158A,Section 158AA

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~26 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 1167/2018 & CM APP No. 44521/2018 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -1 ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Ruchir Bhatia, Adv. versus BENTLY NEVADA LLC ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Sachit Jolly, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI O R D E R % 26.10.2018 CM APP No.44520/2018 Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed of. ITA 1167/2018 Counsel for the parties state that the present appeal may be disposed of in terms of the order dated 01.06.2018 passed in ITA No. 661/2018, The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-1 (International Taxation) vs. General Electric Power Systems INC. It is stated that this would be in consonance with Sections 158A and 158AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961, though these provisions are not strictly applicable. 2. The question raised by the Revenue in these appeals relates to levy of interest under Section 234B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which issue is covered against them vide the judgment of this Court in ‘Director of Income

Tax (International Taxation) vs. GE Packaged Power Inc.’, (2015) 373 ITR 65 (Delhi). 3. The appeal against the said decision is pending before the Supreme Court as special leave to appeal has been granted. 4. Counsel for the parties state that the ruling by the Supreme Court would equally apply to the present appeal. Recording the above, this appeal is disposed of. 5. In case of any difficulty, it will be open to the parties to file an application in this appeal after the decision of the Supreme Court. 6. The appeal for the purpose of registry would be treated as disposed of. SANJIV KHANNA, J. ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI, J. OCTOBER 26, 2018 neelam

More judgments on Section 234B

All 10,214 judgments and leading authorities on Section 234B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →