Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI ‘L’ BENCH, MUMBAI
This appeal, filed by the assessee, is directed against the order dated 15th 1. October 2004 passed by the learned CIT(A), in the matter of assessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 r.w.s. 163 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2001-02.
Grievances raised by the assessee are as follows:
“1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) (C.I.T.) erred in rejecting appellant's submission that the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 144 without granting sufficient time as prayed by Assessment year: 2001-02 Page 2 of 3 the appellant was in violation of statutory provisions and principles of natural justice and hence bad in law and illegal. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO ABOVE: 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned C.I.T. (Appeals) erred in confirming the action of the assessing officer to tax interest awards as income taxable in India on the basis of decision in appellate order in the case of Caribjet Inc.
3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned C.I.T. (Appeals) erred in confirming action of the Assessing Officer of subjecting appellant to tax as agent of Caribjet Inc. In respect of same amount of compensation and interest in respect of which simultaneous assessment has been made in the hands of Caribjet Inc.
The learned C.I.T. (Appeals) erred in rejecting submission of the appellant that the Department having already treated the appellant as assessee in default in respect of compensation and interest paid to Caribjet Inc by passing order u/s 195(2) read with Sec. 201 of the Income Tax Act 1961 and in the circumstances of the case and in law the learned C.I.T. (A) further erred in upholding validity of the impugned order passed by the learned Assessing Officer.
The appellant respectfully submits that the learned C.I.T. (A) having held that compensation receivable by Caribjet Inc under the award was taxable in earlier year i.e. Asst Year 2000-01 erred in holding that amount of interest awards was taxable in Asst. Year 2001-02 and not in the year (Asst. Year 2000-01), where the compensation award was taxable in the hands of the Caribjet Inc.”
Learned representatives fairly agree that the issue is covered, against the assessee, by a coordinate bench decision of this Tribunal, even as learned counsel for the assessee reiterated his stand. However, as a result of our order of even date, the amount of arbitral reward of US $ 22.4 million has been held to be taxable in the hands of the assessee in the assessment year 2000-01. To that extent, the same income cannot be taxed in the hands of the assessee again. That’s the only point on which the assessee may get some relief, if at all. No other issues were pressed before us at this stage. Assessment year: 2001-02
Page 3 of 3 4. In the light of the above discussions, and with the above observations, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Pronounced in the open court today on the 5th day of April, 2016.