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

PDF · subscribers
ITA/482/2018HC DelhiDLHC01094701201818 May 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 High Court dismissed the Revenue's appeal. The Court noted that the ITAT had followed its own previous decisions in cases such as 'Director of Income Tax vs. Jacabs Civil Incorporated', 'Director of Income Tax, International Taxation vs. GE Packaged Power Inc. and Ors.', and 'Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation-2 vs. ZTE Corporation'. Since the ITAT's order was based on these High Court rulings, the Court held that no substantial question of law arises for consideration in the present appeal. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed as untenable. The operative direction was the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal.

What were the facts?

The Revenue, represented by the Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation)-3, filed an appeal against a decision of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The dispute concerns the collection of interest on the non-deposit of advance tax in relation to an amount received by the non-resident assessee, Shanghai Electric Group Co. Ltd. This appeal is identical to other appeals (ITA 409-410/2018) for a different assessment year, which were previously dismissed by the High Court on April 9, 2018. The ITAT had relied on previous High Court rulings in its decision.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should entertain the Revenue's appeal against the ITAT's decision regarding the collection of interest on non-deposit of advance tax for a non-resident assessee, when the ITAT has followed previous High Court judgments. (Question of law) The Revenue contended that an appeal lies against the ITAT's order. However, the judgment does not record specific arguments from the Revenue regarding the merits of the interest collection. The Revenue's appeal is based on the premise that the ITAT's decision is appealable. The Assessee (Shanghai Electric Group Co. Ltd.) did not present arguments as the High Court dismissed the appeal on the grounds that no substantial question of law arises, following its own precedents. The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the assessee.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 482/2018 & CM APPL 16027-16028/2018 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXINTERNATIONAL TAXATION -3

..... Appellant Through Mr.Ruchir Bhatia, Sr.Standing Counsel.

versus

SHANGHAI ELECTRIC GROUP CO. LTD ..... Respondent Through Mr.Deepak Chopra and Mr.Amit Shrivastava, Advs.

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

O R D E R %

18.05.2018

The Revenue’s appeal questions the decision of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter ‘ITAT’) with respect to the collection of interest on non-deposit of advance tax, in regard to the amount received by non-resident/assessee.

Identical appeals for another assessment year (ITA 409- 410/2018, The Commissioner of Income Tax International Taxation-3 vs. Shanghai Electric Group Co.Ltd.) were rejected by this Court on 09.4.2018. The Court had then observed, as follows: “The Tribunal (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) had followed the decisions of this Court in the case of „Director of Income Tax vs. Jacabs Civil Incorporated‟, (2001) 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.”

For the same reasons the present appeal is rejected along with pending applications.

S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J

A. K. CHAWLA, J MAY 18, 2018 ndn

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →