BECHTEL POWER CORPORATION,UNITED STATES vs. ACIT CIRCLE-INTERNATIONA TAXATION 1(1)(2), NEW DELHI

PDF
ITA 796/DEL/2021Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 January 2024AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI G.S. PANNU (Vice President), SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (Vice President)20 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

Facts

Two assessees (UK and USA tax residents) provided engineering and procurement support services to Reliance Industries Limited (RIL) for its plants in Jamnagar SEZ. The Assessing Officer initially treated their receipts as Fee for Technical Services/Included Services (FTS/FIS) under DTAAs. The Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP), however, directed the AO to tax these receipts primarily as business income attributable to a Permanent Establishment (PE) under DTAA Articles 6 & 7, and only protectively as FTS/FIS under section 44DA.

Held

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer failed to implement the binding directions of the DRP by substantively taxing the receipts as FTS/FIS instead of business income attributable to PE. Relying on Section 144C of the Income Tax Act and judicial precedents, the Tribunal concluded that such non-implementation renders the final assessment orders wholly without jurisdiction and void-ab-initio, as the AO is duty-bound to implement DRP directions in letter and spirit.

Key Issues

Whether the final assessment orders passed by the Assessing Officer, failing to implement the binding directions of the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP), are valid or rendered void-ab-initio.

Sections Cited

Section 144C, Section 44DA, Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 148, Section 153(3)B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘D’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI G.S. PANNU, VICE- & SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE-

For Appellant: Ms. Priya Tandon, Adv. &
For Respondent: DR &
Hearing: 05.01.2024Pronounced: 31.01.2024

per statutory mandate, the Assessing Officers are bound to

follow the directions of DRP. Non-implementation of the

directions issued by DRP, either consciously or due to non-

19 ITA Nos. 8904 & 8905/Del/2019; 795 & 796/Del/2021

application of mind by the Assessing Officers often put the

department in an embarrassing situation as the learned

counsels appearing for the Revenue find it difficult to defend

the action of the Assessing Officers. Such repeated instances

of non-implementation of directions of learned DRP by the

Assessing Officers expose lack of proper orientation and

training. We hope and expect that the authorities concerned

would look into this aspect and address the issue with the

seriousness it deserves. We leave the issue at that.

16.

In the result, all the four appeals are allowed on this

limited issue.

Order pronounced in the open court on 31.01.2024.

Sd/- Sd/-

(G.S. PANNU) (SAKTIJIT DEY) VICE-PRESIDENT VICE-PRESIDENT

Dated: 31.01.2024 *aks/- & RK/-

20 ITA Nos. 8904 & 8905/Del/2019; 795 & 796/Del/2021

BECHTEL POWER CORPORATION,UNITED STATES vs ACIT CIRCLE-INTERNATIONA TAXATION 1(1)(2), NEW DELHI | BharatTax