Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI RAGHVENDRA SINGH CHAUHAN AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA
INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 08 of 2017
26TH MARCH, 2021
Between:
Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation-3)
…Appellant
and
B.J. Services Company Middle East Ltd. …………Respondent
Counsel for the appellant
: Mr. Hari Mohan
Bhatia, learned
counsel.
Counsel for the respondent : Mr. P. R. Mullick,
learned counsel
The Court made the following:
JUDGMENT : (per Hon’ble The Chief Justice Sri Raghvendra Singh Chauhan)
The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the following substantial questions of law are raised in the present appeal:- (i) Whether on the facts and in the
circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT
has erred in holding that receipts on account of
service tax/VAT are not includible in gross
revenue of the assessee for the purpose of
computation of profits under the provisions of
section 44BB of the I.T. Act, 1961 if the service
tax/VAT have been separately charged in the
bills and accordingly accounted for. (ii) Whether the ITAT has erred in not
appreciating the fact that section 44BB of the
Act is a self-contained code providing for
computation of profit at a fixed percentage of
gross receipts of the assessee and all the
deductions and exclusions from the gross
receipts are deemed to have been allowed to
the assessee. (iii) Whether the ITAT has erred in not
appreciating the fact that once the receipts are
offered to tax u/s 44BB of the Act which
provides for computation of profits on gross
basis, there is no scope for computing or re-
computing the profits by excluding any part of
the receipts from the total turnover as the same
would amount to defeating the very purpose of
providing for a presumptive scheme of taxation
u/s 44BB of the Act and obviating the need for
maintaining accounts for individuals receipts,
payments etc. (iv) Whether the ITAT has erred in
ignoring the ratio of the judgment in the case of
M/s Chowringhee Sales Bureau (P) Ltd. (82 ITR
542, SC) wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has
held that the sales Tax collected by an assessee
in the ordinary course of its business forms part
of its business receipts. Owing to the inherent
similarity in the nature of sales tax and service
tax, the ratio of the judgment in the said case is
directly applicable to the instant case.
On the other hand, Mr. P.R. Mullick, learned counsel for the assessee submits that an identical substantial questions of law were raised before this Court in the case of Director of Income-tax International Taxation vs. Schlumberger Asia Services Ltd., (2019) 104 taxmann.com 353 (Uttarakhand) (FB).
According to the learned counsel, the said decision was rendered by Full Bench of this Court. Moreover, this Court has answered the substantial questions of law against the Revenue Department. Therefore, even, the substantial questions of law which have been raised in the present appeal are squarely covered and answered by the decision of the Learned Full Bench of this Court. 3.
Heard learned counsel for the parties. 4.
A bare perusal of the substantial questions of law mentioned hereinabove, and in the judgment rendered in the case of Schlumberger Asia Services Ltd., (Supra) clearly reveals that the substantial questions of law being raised in the present appeal have already been answered by the learned Full Bench in the aforementioned case. Therefore, this Court does not find any merit in the present appeal. It is, hereby, dismissed.
_____________________________ RAGHVENDRA SINGH CHAUHAN, C.J.
___________________ ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.
Dt: 26th March, 2021 JKJ/Pant