Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘I-2’ NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI H.S. SIDHU & SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI
ORDER PER SHRI H.S. SIDHU, J.M.
This appeal by the assessee has been directed against the order dated 08.08.2017 for AY 2013-14.
The aforesaid appeal came up for hearing before this Bench today i.e. on 09/08/2019. We have received a letter dated 15/05/2019 written by the Authorized Representative of the assessee. The contents of the same are reproduced as under:
15 May 2019 The Hon’ble Members, Bench- ‘F’ The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Lok Nayak Bhawan, Khan Market, New Delhi – 110003.
Appellant :Rolls Royce PLC PAN :AACCR6911L Assessment Year :2013-14 Reference :Appeal No. 7294/Del/2017 filed on 06.12.2017 Subject :Request for withdrawal of appeal no. 7294/Del/2017 May It Please Your Honours:
1. 1. This has reference to captioned appeal no. 7294/Del/2017 filed before this Hon’ble Tribunal on 06.12.2017 against the assessment order dated 28.09.2017 passed by the Ld. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 3(1)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi under section 143(3)/144C(13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’).
2. The Appellant had in the said appeal challenged the addition of INR 31,96,66,849/- made by the Ld. AO.
3. In this regard, the Appellant submits that it had approached the Competent Authorities by invoking the provisions of Article 27 of the Double Tax Avoidance Agreement between India and United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (‘India-UK tax treaty’) relating to resolution of disputes by Mutual Agreement Procedure (‘MAP’) for the AY 2013-14.
4. The Competent Authorities of India and UK have now reached a resolution and passed an order dated 29.04.2019, wherein the Competent Authorities have held that the liaison office of Rolls Royce PLC ceased to undertake any significant activity during the AY 2013-14, which would require profit attribution and hence no profits can be attributed to the liaison office in the said AY. The relevant extracts of the order are reproduced hereunder: “2.1 the Liaison Office of Rolls Royce PLC ceased to undertake any significant activity during the AYs 2013-14 and 2014-15, which would require attribution of profits. Accordingly, no profit would be attributed for the AY 2013-14 and 2014-15 to the Permanent Establishment (PE) of Rolls Royce PLC.”
5. In view of the above, the primary issue involved in the issue in appeal now stands decided in favour of the Appellant.
Separately, the provisions of Rule 44H(4) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 (‘The Rules’), provides that to give effect to resolution arrived at under mutual agreement procedure, the assessee is required to withdraw its appeal, if any, pending on the issue which was the subject matter for adjudication under mutual agreement procedure.
Since the primary issue in adjudication before this Hon’ble Tribunal was the subject matter of adjudication under mutual agreement procedure, the resolution of which has been decided in favour of the Appellant by the Competent Authorities of India and UK. Accordingly, the Appellant, in compliance with the provisions of Rule 44H(4) of the Rules wishes to withdraw the captioned appeal filed before this Hon’ble Bench and humbly prays before the Hon’ble Bench to permit withdrawal of captioned appeal. We request this Hon’ble Bench to kindly permit withdrawal of the captioned appeal (Appeal No. 7294/DEL/2017) by the Appellant and kindly oblige. Thanking you, Yours faithfully, For Rolls Royce PLC Sd/- Name: TOM ASTILE
We have conveyed the contents of the aforesaid letter to the Ld. Sr. DR and pointed out that assessee wants to withdrawal this appeal. He has not raised any objection on the request of the assessee.