Inmarsat Global Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) Circle 2(2)(1), Mumbai
The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations
ITA 7025/MUM/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Oct 2020AY 2015-16
Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Ravish Soodinmarsat Global Limited Deputy Commissioner Of Income C/O Srbc & Associates Llp, Tax (International Taxation) 14Th Floor, The Ruby, Circle 2(2)(1), 17Th Floor, Vs. 20 Senapati Bapat Marg, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Dadar (W), Mumbai 400 028 Mumbai 400 021 Pan – Aaaci6098K (Appellant) (Respondent)
For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwala &For Respondent: Shri Avaneesh Tiwari, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 253Section 9(1)(vi)
…the Assessing Officer and submitted that, so far as Data Processing Cost is concerned, the same is in the nature of „Royalty‟ and in support he has strongly relied upon the two Karnataka High Court decisions in the case of:- i) CIT vs. Wipro Ltd., reported in 355 ITR 284; ii) CIT vs. CGI Information Systems & Management Consultants (P) Ltd., 226 Taxman 319 The issue whether the amendment brought by Finance Act 2012 in Section 9(1)(vi) by way of Explanations inserted in the Income-tax Act with retrospective effect can be read into DTAA or not has to be seen in the light of the decision of Hon‟ble Bombay High Court…