THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -3 vs. SHANGHAI ELECTRIC GROUP CO. LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA/409/2018HC DelhiDLHC01094447201809 April 2018Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The Delhi High Court held that no question of law arises in these appeals. The Tribunal had followed the consistent rulings of the Delhi High Court in the cases of 'Director of Income Tax vs. Jacabs Civil Incorporated' (2011) 330 ITR 578, 'Director of Income Tax, International Taxation vs. GE Packaged Power Inc. and ors.' (2015) 373 ITR 65, and 'Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation-2 vs. ZTE Corporation' (2017) 392 ITR 80. As the Tribunal's decision was based on these precedents, the appeals were deemed untenable. The High Court dismissed the appeals, thereby upholding the ITAT's order which likely did not allow the collection of interest for non-deposit of advance tax in the circumstances.

What were the facts?

The appeals were filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation - 3) against the assessee, Shanghai Electric Group Co. Ltd. The assessment years are not explicitly stated. The appeals challenge the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) concerning the collection of interest for non-deposit of advance tax by the non-resident assessee on consideration received. The ITAT had followed previous decisions of the Delhi High Court in similar matters.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Revenue is entitled to collect interest for the non-deposit of advance tax in respect of the consideration received by the non-resident assessee? (Question of law) Assessee's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the assessee. However, it is implied that the assessee's position was upheld by the ITAT. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue urged the question of law with respect to the collection of interest for non-deposit of advance tax. The Revenue's argument is not detailed, but the appeal itself signifies their disagreement with the ITAT's decision.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~52 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 52 + ITA 409/2018 & CM APPL. 13407/2018 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -3

..... Appellant

Through: Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Advocate.

versus

SHANGHAI ELECTRIC GROUP CO. LTD ..... Respondent

Through: Mr. Deepak Chopra and Mr. Amit

Shrivastava, Advocates.

WITH 53

ITA 410/2018 & CM APPL. 13408-13409/2018 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -3

..... Appellant

Through: Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Advocate.

versus

SHANGHAI ELECTRIC GROUP CO. LTD ..... Respondent

Through: Mr. Deepak Chopra and Mr. Amit

Shrivastava, Advocates.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA

O R D E R %

09.04.2018

The question of law urged by the Revenue is with respect to the collection of interest for non-deposit of advance tax in respect of the

consideration received by the non-resident assessee. The Tribunal (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) had followed the decisions of this Court in the cases of ‘Director of Income Tax vs. Jacabs Civil Incorporated’, (2011) 330 ITR 578, ‘Director of Income Tax, International Taxation vs. GE Packaged Power Inc. and ors.’, (2015) 373 ITR 65 and ‘Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation-2 vs. ZTE Corporation’, (2017) 392 ITR 80. Since the Tribunal followed the rulings of this Court no question of law arises. These appeals are dismissed as untenable along with pending applications.

S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J

A. K. CHAWLA, J APRIL 09, 2018 nn

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →