THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. O.N.G.C.

ITA/33/1999HC UttarakhandUKHC01014998200424 May 2004Bench: OTHER1 pages

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was legally correct in directing the application of single-stage grossing up of tax perquisites paid by ONGC on behalf of the assessee, instead of the multi-stage grossing up applied by the Assessing Officer under section 195-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Court found that the matter was squarely covered by its previous decision dated 30th September, 2003, in Income Tax Appeal No. 470 of 2001 (Commissioner of Income Tax, Meerut & another Vs O.N.G.C., Dehradun). The question was answered in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the Department. The appeal was disposed of accordingly, with no order as to costs.

What were the facts?

The appeal concerns Assessment Year 1990-91. The Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) and another are the appellants, and ONGC, Dehradun, representing Mr. Souleimanov Roustan, is the respondent. The case involves a dispute over the method of grossing up tax perquisites paid by ONGC on behalf of the assessee. The Assessing Officer applied a multi-stage grossing up, while the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) directed the application of single-stage grossing up. The present appeal challenges the ITAT's decision.

What were the issues?

1. Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was legally correct in directing to apply single-stage grossing up of tax perquisites paid by ONGC on behalf of the assessee instead of multi-stage grossing up applied by the Assessing Officer under section 195-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961? Assessee's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the assessee. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, represented by the Commissioner of Income Tax, argued that the Assessing Officer's application of multi-stage grossing up was correct. The revenue's argument implicitly challenges the ITAT's direction for single-stage grossing up.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

195-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Assessment Year 1990-91 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL I.T.A. No. 241 of 2001 OLD NO. 33 OF 1999

The Commissioner of Income Tax, Meerut & another ........... Appellants Versus O.N.G.C., Dehradun As representative of Mr. Souleimanov Roustan ……Respondent

Hon. P.C. Verma, A.C.J. Hon. Rajesh Tandon, J.

Mr. S.K. Posti, learned counsel for the Tax Deptt. Mr. J.P. Joshi, learned counsel for the respondent.

The matter is squarely covered by our decision dated 30th September, 2003 in Income Tax Appeal No. 470 of 2001; The Commissioner of Income Tax, Meerut & another Vs O.N.G.C., Dehradun. The question raised before us is as follows:

"Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was legally correct in directing to apply single stage grossing up of the Tax perquisites paid by ONGC on behalf of the assessee instead of multi stage grossing up, applied by the Assessing Officer under section 195-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961?" For the reasons recorded in the above judgment in Income Tax Appeal No. 470 of 2001 dated 30th September, 2003, we answer this question in the affirmative i.e. in favour of the assessee and against the Department. Appeal is disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs.

Dt. 24.05.2004 G (Rajesh Tandon, J.) (P.C. Verma, A.C.J.)

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →