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

PDF · subscribers
ITA/12/2004HC UttarakhandUKHC01004853200407 March 2006Author: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P. C. VERMA2 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court, in its decision dated March 07, 2006, allowed the appeal filed by the Revenue. The Court noted that a similar substantial question of law had been considered by a Division Bench of the same High Court in the case of "Commissioner of Income Tax and another vs. O.N.G.C. as agent of M/s Foramer France, Dehradun," decided on December 15, 2005. In that previous judgment, the question was answered in favor of the Revenue. Following this precedent, the High Court applied the same reasoning and allowed the present appeal. The operative direction was to allow the appeal, implying that the assessment should be made under Section 44D read with Section 115A, as argued by the Revenue, overturning the ITAT's decision.

What were the facts?

This Indian ITAT judgment concerns an appeal filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax and Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Dehradun (the Revenue) against an order dated 24.11.2003 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bench 'C', New Delhi. The assessment year in question is 1996-97. The appeal challenges the Tribunal's decision to uphold the Commissioner (Appeals)'s finding that the consideration received by the assessee, Oil & Natural Gas Corporation acting as agent for M/s European Gas Turbine India Ltd., U.K., was taxable under Section 44BB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and not under Section 44D read with Section 115A of the Act. The High Court was considering the substantial question of law framed in the appeal.

What were the issues?

The primary question of law before the High Court was: Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned I.T.A.T. was legally justified in upholding the decision of learned CIT(A) that consideration received by the assessee was chargeable to tax under the provisions of Sections 44BB of the Act and not under Section 44-D read with Section 115-A of the Act? The Revenue argued that the consideration should be taxed under Section 44D read with Section 115A. The assessee contended that the consideration was taxable under Section 44BB. The judgment does not explicitly detail the arguments of each side beyond stating the core issue and the relevant sections of the Act. The Tribunal's decision, which was under challenge, favored the assessee's contention for taxation under Section 44BB.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 44BB,Section 44D,Section 115A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

COURT NO.2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL

Income Tax Appeal No. 12 of 2004

1.

The Commissioner of Income Tax, Dehradun 2. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Range,

Dehradun

……………..Appellants

Versus

Oil & Natural Gas Corpn., Tel Bhawan, Dehradun as agent of M/s European Gas Turbine India Ltd., U.K.

……………. Respondent

Ld. Standing counsel for the Revenue. Sri J.P. Joshi, learned counsel for the respondent

Dated: March 07, 2006

Coram: Hon. P.C. Verma, J. Hon. B.C. Kandpal, J.

Both the parties are ready to argue the matter today.

This appeal has been preferred against the order dated 24.11.2003 for the assessment year 1996-97, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, (Bench ‘C’ New Delhi).

The substantial question of law framed in the memo of appeal for our consideration is as follows: - Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned I.T.A.T. was legally justified in upholding the decision of learned CIT(A) that consideration received by the assessee was chargeable to tax under the provisions of Sections 44BB of the Act and not under Section 44-D read with Section 115-A of the Act?

The aforementioned question was considered by a Division Bench of this Court {in which one of us (P.C.Verma,J.) was a member} in the case of “Commissioner of Income Tax and another vs. O.N.G.C. as agent of M/s Foramer France, Dehradun, which was decided on 15.12.2005 in Income Tax Appeal No.239 of 2001. In the said judgment, the question framed in the said appeal was answered in favour of the Revenue.

Following the judgment of Division Bench of this Court, we allow the appeal.

(B.C. Kandpal, J.) (P.C. Verma, J.)

Rajeev Dang

More judgments on Section 44BB

All 388 judgments and leading authorities on Section 44BB →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →