Para 3.1, 5.2, 12.1, 13 8. DCIT v. Boston Consulting Group Pte. Ltd.

94 ITD 31Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2005#2963 most cited

What is Para 3.1, 5.2, 12.1, 13 8. DCIT v. Boston Consulting Group Pte. Ltd. authority for?

The Delhi Tribunal, in citing Boston Consulting Group, examines the taxability of fees for services, particularly concerning whether such fees constitute 'fees for technical services' under Indian domestic law or are covered by a tax treaty. The decision likely clarifies the application of treaty provisions over domestic law for certain service fees when determining the taxability of a foreign enterprise in India.

40

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

DCIT v Boston Consulting Group Pte. Ltd · 94 ITD 31 · ITAT 2005 · fees for technical services · tax treaty · permanent establishment · section 9(1)(vii) · section 90 · international taxation

Sections most often in play

Section 143(2)Section 12 Section 147 Section 148 Section 143(3)Section 1961 Section 144C(13)Section 12(3)

Issues it is cited on

management fees fees for technical services computer software enduring benefit tax treaty permanent establishment fees for included services withholding tax section 9(1)(vii)beneficial owner section 90 section 9(1)

Judgments citing Para 3.1, 5.2, 12.1, 13 8. DCIT v. Boston Consulting Group Pte. Ltd.

Schawk India Private Ltd, Chennai vs. DCIT, Corporate Circle 6(1), Chennai

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee stand allowed

ITA 100/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.100, 101 & 103/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Sriram Seshadri, CAFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT

…made available to the recipient in India, there is no need for deduction of tax under Section 195 of the Act. The Ld. representative has also placed reliance on the decision of Mumbai Bench of this Tribunal in DCIT v. Boston Consulting Group Pte. Ltd. (2005) 94 ITD 31 and submitted that the Mumbai Bench has specifically considered the Singapore-India (2017) 78 taxmann.com 5 and also decision of the Special Bench of this Tribunal at Mumbai in Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. v. DCIT (2009) 30 SOT 374. The Ld. representative has also placed reliance on the judgment of Delhi High Court in DIT v. Guy Carpenter & Co. Ltd.…

M/S Sumitomo Corporation, New Delhi vs. DCIT (International Taxation), New Delhi

Appeal are allowed

ITA 6385/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

…ently excludes the operation of section 44D of the Act. The Ld. AR submitted that taxation on Gross Basis in the instant case as upheld by the CIT(A) is an arbitrary and absurd interpretation. The Ld. AR relied upon the decisions in cases of Boston Consulting 94 ITD 31 (Mum) and Horizontal Drilling 237 ITR 142 (AAR). The Ld. AR further submitted that it is also settled that, an interpretation, which lead to absurdity, otherwise should not be preferred. Further, the Ld. AR submitted that as per Article 24(2) of the India- Japan DTAA, the income of the PE should not be taxed less favorably than the resident of Indi…

M/S Sumitomo Corporation, New Delhi vs. DCIT (International Taxation), New Delhi

Appeal are allowed

ITA 6384/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

…ently excludes the operation of section 44D of the Act. The Ld. AR submitted that taxation on Gross Basis in the instant case as upheld by the CIT(A) is an arbitrary and absurd interpretation. The Ld. AR relied upon the decisions in cases of Boston Consulting 94 ITD 31 (Mum) and Horizontal Drilling 237 ITR 142 (AAR). The Ld. AR further submitted that it is also settled that, an interpretation, which lead to absurdity, otherwise should not be preferred. Further, the Ld. AR submitted that as per Article 24(2) of the India- Japan DTAA, the income of the PE should not be taxed less favorably than the resident of Indi…

Sumitomo Corporation, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Appeal are allowed

ITA 1114/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

…ently excludes the operation of section 44D of the Act. The Ld. AR submitted that taxation on Gross Basis in the instant case as upheld by the CIT(A) is an arbitrary and absurd interpretation. The Ld. AR relied upon the decisions in cases of Boston Consulting 94 ITD 31 (Mum) and Horizontal Drilling 237 ITR 142 (AAR). The Ld. AR further submitted that it is also settled that, an interpretation, which lead to absurdity, otherwise should not be preferred. Further, the Ld. AR submitted that as per Article 24(2) of the India- Japan DTAA, the income of the PE should not be taxed less favorably than the resident of Indi…

DDIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sumitomo Corporation, New Delhi

Appeal are allowed

ITA 3714/DEL/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jul 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

…ently excludes the operation of section 44D of the Act. The Ld. AR submitted that taxation on Gross Basis in the instant case as upheld by the CIT(A) is an arbitrary and absurd interpretation. The Ld. AR relied upon the decisions in cases of Boston Consulting 94 ITD 31 (Mum) and Horizontal Drilling 237 ITR 142 (AAR). The Ld. AR further submitted that it is also settled that, an interpretation, which lead to absurdity, otherwise should not be preferred. Further, the Ld. AR submitted that as per Article 24(2) of the India- Japan DTAA, the income of the PE should not be taxed less favorably than the resident of Indi…

DDIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sumitomo Corporation, New Delhi

Appeal are allowed

ITA 3713/DEL/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jul 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

…ently excludes the operation of section 44D of the Act. The Ld. AR submitted that taxation on Gross Basis in the instant case as upheld by the CIT(A) is an arbitrary and absurd interpretation. The Ld. AR relied upon the decisions in cases of Boston Consulting 94 ITD 31 (Mum) and Horizontal Drilling 237 ITR 142 (AAR). The Ld. AR further submitted that it is also settled that, an interpretation, which lead to absurdity, otherwise should not be preferred. Further, the Ld. AR submitted that as per Article 24(2) of the India- Japan DTAA, the income of the PE should not be taxed less favorably than the resident of Indi…

DDIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sumitomo Corporation, New Delhi

Appeal are allowed

ITA 3696/DEL/2014[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jul 2019AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

…ently excludes the operation of section 44D of the Act. The Ld. AR submitted that taxation on Gross Basis in the instant case as upheld by the CIT(A) is an arbitrary and absurd interpretation. The Ld. AR relied upon the decisions in cases of Boston Consulting 94 ITD 31 (Mum) and Horizontal Drilling 237 ITR 142 (AAR). The Ld. AR further submitted that it is also settled that, an interpretation, which lead to absurdity, otherwise should not be preferred. Further, the Ld. AR submitted that as per Article 24(2) of the India- Japan DTAA, the income of the PE should not be taxed less favorably than the resident of Indi…

DDIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sumitomo Corporation, New Delhi

Appeal are allowed

ITA 3695/DEL/2014[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jul 2019AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

…ently excludes the operation of section 44D of the Act. The Ld. AR submitted that taxation on Gross Basis in the instant case as upheld by the CIT(A) is an arbitrary and absurd interpretation. The Ld. AR relied upon the decisions in cases of Boston Consulting 94 ITD 31 (Mum) and Horizontal Drilling 237 ITR 142 (AAR). The Ld. AR further submitted that it is also settled that, an interpretation, which lead to absurdity, otherwise should not be preferred. Further, the Ld. AR submitted that as per Article 24(2) of the India- Japan DTAA, the income of the PE should not be taxed less favorably than the resident of Indi…

Sumitomo Corporation, Delhi vs. DDIT, New Delhi

Appeal are allowed

ITA 3677/DEL/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jul 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

…ently excludes the operation of section 44D of the Act. The Ld. AR submitted that taxation on Gross Basis in the instant case as upheld by the CIT(A) is an arbitrary and absurd interpretation. The Ld. AR relied upon the decisions in cases of Boston Consulting 94 ITD 31 (Mum) and Horizontal Drilling 237 ITR 142 (AAR). The Ld. AR further submitted that it is also settled that, an interpretation, which lead to absurdity, otherwise should not be preferred. Further, the Ld. AR submitted that as per Article 24(2) of the India- Japan DTAA, the income of the PE should not be taxed less favorably than the resident of Indi…

Sumitomo Corporation, Delhi vs. DDIT, New Delhi

Appeal are allowed

ITA 3676/DEL/2014[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jul 2019AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

…ently excludes the operation of section 44D of the Act. The Ld. AR submitted that taxation on Gross Basis in the instant case as upheld by the CIT(A) is an arbitrary and absurd interpretation. The Ld. AR relied upon the decisions in cases of Boston Consulting 94 ITD 31 (Mum) and Horizontal Drilling 237 ITR 142 (AAR). The Ld. AR further submitted that it is also settled that, an interpretation, which lead to absurdity, otherwise should not be preferred. Further, the Ld. AR submitted that as per Article 24(2) of the India- Japan DTAA, the income of the PE should not be taxed less favorably than the resident of Indi…

Sumitomo Corporation, New Delhi vs. DDIT, New Delhi

Appeal are allowed

ITA 3675/DEL/2014[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jul 2019AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

…ently excludes the operation of section 44D of the Act. The Ld. AR submitted that taxation on Gross Basis in the instant case as upheld by the CIT(A) is an arbitrary and absurd interpretation. The Ld. AR relied upon the decisions in cases of Boston Consulting 94 ITD 31 (Mum) and Horizontal Drilling 237 ITR 142 (AAR). The Ld. AR further submitted that it is also settled that, an interpretation, which lead to absurdity, otherwise should not be preferred. Further, the Ld. AR submitted that as per Article 24(2) of the India- Japan DTAA, the income of the PE should not be taxed less favorably than the resident of Indi…

DCIT (International Taxation), Gurgaon vs. M/S. Msv International Inc., Gurgaon

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2187/DEL/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri R.K. Panda

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 44D

…computation u/ s 44D. It would Practically mean going back to article 12(2) of the treaty and render provisions of article .12(6) redundant. This issue was examined by Mumbai Tribunal in the case of DCIT' vs. Boston Consulting Group Pvt. Ltd. Reported at 2005 94 ITD 31 Mum. in the context of the Indo- Singapore Tax Treaty. It was held as under: "that non-deduction of expenses under Section 44D, which means that the taxability is on gross basis, is coupled with a special rate of tax for such income on gross basis under section 115A. A somewhat similar scheme of taxability of royalties and fees for technical servic…

DCIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Sutherland Gloabal Services Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

ITA 2051/CHNY/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Feb 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Abraham P.George & Shri George Mathan

For Appellant: Shri. V. Lakshmikumaran, AdvFor Respondent: Shri. Sailendra Mamidi, CIT

Section 115JSection 195Section 201

…decisions :- Bharath Petroleum Corporation Ltd. vs. JDIT. (2007) 14 SOT 307, Mumbai Mckinsey & Co Inc vs. ADIT (2006) 99 ITD 549,Mumbai National Organic Chemical Industries vs DCIT, (2006) 5 SOT 317, Mumbai DCIT vs. Boston Consulting Group Pte Ltd. (2005) 94 ITD 31, Mumbai NQA Quality Systems…

Sutherland Global Services Private Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

ITA 2002/CHNY/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Feb 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Abraham P.George & Shri George Mathan

For Appellant: Shri. V. Lakshmikumaran, AdvFor Respondent: Shri. Sailendra Mamidi, CIT

Section 115JSection 195Section 201

…decisions :- Bharath Petroleum Corporation Ltd. vs. JDIT. (2007) 14 SOT 307, Mumbai Mckinsey & Co Inc vs. ADIT (2006) 99 ITD 549,Mumbai National Organic Chemical Industries vs DCIT, (2006) 5 SOT 317, Mumbai DCIT vs. Boston Consulting Group Pte Ltd. (2005) 94 ITD 31, Mumbai NQA Quality Systems…

D.D.I.T. (I.T.) 2(1), Mumbai vs. Siemens Ltd., Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by assessee is as allowed

ITA 8368/MUM/2011[]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2017

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

Section 195Section 195(2)Section 2Section 9Section 9(1)(vii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “L”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM ITA No.8368/Mum/2011 & 8367/Mum/2011 (Assessment Year:2011-12) DDIT (I.T)2(1), Mumbai Vs. M/s.Siemens Ltd., - 400038 130, Pandurang Budhkar Marg, Worli, Mumbai-400018 PAN/GIR No. AAACSO764L Appellant) .. Respondent) CO.247/Mum/2012 (Assessment Year:2011-12) M/s.Siemens Ltd., Vs. DDIT (I.T)2(1), Mumbai - 130, Pandurang Budhkar 400038 Marg, Worli, Mumbai- 400018 PAN/GIR No. AACSO764L Appellant) .. Respondent) Revenue by Shri K.L.Kanak Assessee by Shri Nitesh Joshi Date of Hearing 23/ 02/2017 Date of Pronoun…

Reliance Natural Resources Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 7(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6843/MUM/2012[208-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2016

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Ravish Soodthe Dcit -7(2), Aaykar Bhavan,M.K.Road, Mumbai 400 020 ..... Appellant Vs. M/S. Reliance Natural Resources Ltd. H-Block, 1St Floor, Dhirubhai Ambani Knowledge City, Thane-Belapur Road, Koperkhairane, Navi Mumbai 400 710 Pan:Aabcr 7656P .... Respondent [ M/S. Reliance Natural Resources Ltd. H-Block, 1St Floor, Dhirubhai Ambani Knowledge City, Thane-Belapur Road, Koperkhairane, Navi Mumbai 400 710 Pan:Aabcr 7656P ... Appellant Vs. The Addl.Cit -7(2), Aaykar Bhavan,M.K.Road, Mumbai 400 020 .... Respondent Revenue By : Shri Jasbir Chouhan Assessee By : S/Shri Jitendra Sanghavi/ Deepak Jain Date Of Hearing : 17/8/2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 24/08/2016 (Assessment Year : 2008-09) Order Per G.S.Pannu,A.M:

For Appellant: S/Shri Jitendra Sanghavi/ Deepak JainFor Respondent: Shri Jasbir Chouhan

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 37(1)Section 40

…placed reliance earlier before the learned CIT(A): - i) Raymond Ltd. vs DCIT (2003) 86 ITD 791 (Mum) ii) Mahindra & Mahindra (30 SOT 374) (Mum SB) iii) Intratck Testing Services India P. Ltd. (307 ITR 418) (AAR) iv) DCIT vs. Boston Consulting Group Pte Ltd. (94 ITD 31) (Mum) v) ITO vs. De Beers India Minerals P. Ltd. (297 ITR (AT) 1760 (Bangalore) 13.4 We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused and carefully considered the material on record; including the judicial pronouncement cited. We find that the issue under consideration is covered by the decision of the Coordinate Bench of this…

Addl CIT 7(2), Mumbai vs. Reliance Natural Resources Ltd, Navi Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6711/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Ravish Soodthe Dcit -7(2), Aaykar Bhavan,M.K.Road, Mumbai 400 020 ..... Appellant Vs. M/S. Reliance Natural Resources Ltd. H-Block, 1St Floor, Dhirubhai Ambani Knowledge City, Thane-Belapur Road, Koperkhairane, Navi Mumbai 400 710 Pan:Aabcr 7656P .... Respondent [ M/S. Reliance Natural Resources Ltd. H-Block, 1St Floor, Dhirubhai Ambani Knowledge City, Thane-Belapur Road, Koperkhairane, Navi Mumbai 400 710 Pan:Aabcr 7656P ... Appellant Vs. The Addl.Cit -7(2), Aaykar Bhavan,M.K.Road, Mumbai 400 020 .... Respondent Revenue By : Shri Jasbir Chouhan Assessee By : S/Shri Jitendra Sanghavi/ Deepak Jain Date Of Hearing : 17/8/2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 24/08/2016 (Assessment Year : 2008-09) Order Per G.S.Pannu,A.M:

For Appellant: S/Shri Jitendra Sanghavi/ Deepak JainFor Respondent: Shri Jasbir Chouhan

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 37(1)Section 40

…placed reliance earlier before the learned CIT(A): - i) Raymond Ltd. vs DCIT (2003) 86 ITD 791 (Mum) ii) Mahindra & Mahindra (30 SOT 374) (Mum SB) iii) Intratck Testing Services India P. Ltd. (307 ITR 418) (AAR) iv) DCIT vs. Boston Consulting Group Pte Ltd. (94 ITD 31) (Mum) v) ITO vs. De Beers India Minerals P. Ltd. (297 ITR (AT) 1760 (Bangalore) 13.4 We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused and carefully considered the material on record; including the judicial pronouncement cited. We find that the issue under consideration is covered by the decision of the Coordinate Bench of this…

Reliance Natural Resources Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 7(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 847/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jul 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Saktijit Deyreliance Natural Resources Ltd. Addl. Cit, Range 7(2) H Block, 1St Floor, Dhirubhai Room No. 620, 6Th Floor Vs. Ambani Knowledge City Aayakar Bhavan Navi Mumbai 400710 M.K. Road, Mumbai 400020 Pan - Aabcr7656P Appellant Respondent Addl. Cit, Range 7(2) Reliance Natural Resources Ltd. Room No. 620, 6Th Floor H Block, 1St Floor, Dhirubhai Vs. Aayakar Bhavan Ambani Knowledge City M.K. Road, Mumbai 400020 Navi Mumbai 400710 Pan - Aabcr7656P Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra Sanghavi &For Respondent: Shri Jasbir Chouhan

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 195Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

…placed reliance earlier before the learned CIT(A): - i) Raymond Ltd. vs DCIT (2003) 86 ITD 791 (Mum) ii) Mahindra & Mahindra (30 SOT 374) (Mum SB) iii) Intratck Testing Services India P. Ltd. (307 ITR 418) (AAR) iv) DCIT vs. Boston Consulting Group Pte Ltd. (94 ITD 31) (Mum) v) ITO vs. De Beers India Minerals P. Ltd. (297 ITR (AT) 1760 (Bangalore) 13.4 We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused and carefully considered the material on record; including the judicial pronouncement cited. We find that the issue under consideration is covered by the decision of the Coordinate Bench of this T…

Addl CIT 7(2), Mumbai vs. Reliance Natural Resources Ltd, Navi Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1425/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jul 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Saktijit Deyreliance Natural Resources Ltd. Addl. Cit, Range 7(2) H Block, 1St Floor, Dhirubhai Room No. 620, 6Th Floor Vs. Ambani Knowledge City Aayakar Bhavan Navi Mumbai 400710 M.K. Road, Mumbai 400020 Pan - Aabcr7656P Appellant Respondent Addl. Cit, Range 7(2) Reliance Natural Resources Ltd. Room No. 620, 6Th Floor H Block, 1St Floor, Dhirubhai Vs. Aayakar Bhavan Ambani Knowledge City M.K. Road, Mumbai 400020 Navi Mumbai 400710 Pan - Aabcr7656P Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra Sanghavi &For Respondent: Shri Jasbir Chouhan

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 195Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

…placed reliance earlier before the learned CIT(A): - i) Raymond Ltd. vs DCIT (2003) 86 ITD 791 (Mum) ii) Mahindra & Mahindra (30 SOT 374) (Mum SB) iii) Intratck Testing Services India P. Ltd. (307 ITR 418) (AAR) iv) DCIT vs. Boston Consulting Group Pte Ltd. (94 ITD 31) (Mum) v) ITO vs. De Beers India Minerals P. Ltd. (297 ITR (AT) 1760 (Bangalore) 13.4 We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused and carefully considered the material on record; including the judicial pronouncement cited. We find that the issue under consideration is covered by the decision of the Coordinate Bench of this T…

DDIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Msv International Inc., Gurgaon

In the result appeal of the revenue for both the years are dismissed

ITA 1231/DEL/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishiddit, Msv International Inc., Circle-3(2), International D-7, South City-I, Taxation, New Delhi Vs. Gurgaon Pan:Aadcm1304M (Appellant) (Respondent) Ddit, Msv International Inc., Circle-3(2), Room No.411, D-7, South City-I, Vs. International Taxation, Drum Gurgaon Shaped Building, Pan:Aadcm1304M New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh.P Dam Kanunjna, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 44DSection 9

…ter deducting all the expenses incurred by it. The provisions of the said Article do not conclude that the income is to be taxed under presumptive scheme as per section 44D of the Act. For this he relied up on DCIT vs. Boston Consulting Group Pte. Ltd. [2005] 94 ITD 31 (Mum.) f. Assessee was carrying on similar activities in the preceding years as well, and the income earned form the said activities have been accepted by the Department as business income of the assessee. He submitted that in AY 2004-05 assessment order passed u/s 143(3) of the Act has also accepted the version of assessee. 7. We have carefully co…