M/S. SUNDOWNER OFFSHORE INTERNATIONAL (BERMUDA) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADIT, DEHRADUN

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3453/DEL/2014Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 December 2016AY 2010-114 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal upheld the decision of the CIT(A) and the AO, stating that reimbursement of expenditure is includible in revenue as per Section 44BB. The Tribunal found no infirmity in the CIT(A)'s order.

What were the facts?

The assessee received Rs. 66,978,460/- as reimbursement of mobilization/demobilization expenses. The Assessing Officer included this amount in gross receipts under Section 44BB of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

What were the issues?

Whether reimbursement of mobilization/demobilization expenses is includible in gross receipts under Section 44BB of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 44BB

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

This appeal by the Assessee is directed against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-II, Dehradun dated 23.4.2014 pertaining to assessment year 2010-11.

2.

The grounds of appeal read as under:-

Based on the facts and circumstances of the case, your appellant respectfully submits the following ground:

Ground No.

1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law by affirming to the action of the AO and holding that the amounts aggregating to Rs. 66,978,460/-, received by the appellant from the customers as reimbursement of mobilization / demobilization expenses incurred by the appellant, is to be included in the gross receipts u/s 44 BB of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Your appellant prays that the erroneous order be cancelled and appropriate relief may be granted to the appellant. Your appellant craves leave to add to, alter, amend, vary, omit, substitute or delete the aforementioned ground of appeal or add a new ground or grounds of appeal at any time before or at the time of hearing of the appeal.

3. The issue in dispute has been decided by the Ld. CIT(A) against the assessee by affirming the action of the AO in following the decision of the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Halliburton Offshore Services Inc. reported in 300 ITR 265, wherein it has been held that the reimbursement of the expenditure is includible in the revenue as contemplated by section 44BB of the I.T. Act, 1961 (Act).

4. At the outset, Ld. Counsel of the assessee stated that the similar issue in dispute has been decided against the assessee by the ITAT, ‘G’ Bench, New Delhi in (AY 2006-07) by affirming the action of the Ld CIT(A) wherein the Ld. CIT(A) has followed the Jurisdictional High Court decision in the case of CIT vs. Halliburton Offshore Services Inc. reported in 300 ITR 265, as aforesaid. He further stated that the aforesaid decision of Hon’ble High Court was further challenged in the Hon’ble Supreme Court and, therefore, issue is under litigation. In this behalf, he filed the copy of the ITAT order, Hon’ble High Court order and the Hon’ble Supreme Court order dated 7.7.2011.

5.

On the other hand, Ld. DR inter-alia relied upon the aforementioned decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court.

6.

We have heard both the parties and perused the records. We find that the similar issue in dispute has been decided against the assessee by the ITAT, ‘G’ Bench, New Delhi in (AY 2006-07). We further find that in the present case, Ld. CIT(A) has decided this issue in favour of the Department by following the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court, which is binding of all the authorities working under the Jurisdictional of Hon’ble High Court, therefore, we find no infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A), hence we uphold the same and dismiss the Appeal of the assessee on the issue in dispute.

7.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 16/12/2016.

More judgments on Section 44BB

All 388 judgments and leading authorities on Section 44BB →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →