SMITH INTERNATIONAL INC.,MUMBAI vs. ADIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed and both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 4561/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 3824/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Smith International Inc., Vs Adit, 806-807, Powai Plaza, Central International Taxation, Avenue, Hiranandani Garden, Dehradun Powai, Mumbai-400076 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aahcs3148R

87 ITR 542). Also the scheme of presumptive determination u/s 44BB of the Act was considered by Hon’ble Uttarakhand High Court in the case of CIT vs. Halliburton Offshore Services Inc. (300 ITR 265) it was held that this section is a complete code in itself and provides for taxation of all receipts whether arising in India or outside

DDIT, DEHRADUN vs. M/S. SMITH INTERNATIONAL INC., DEHRADUN

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed and both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 4561/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 3824/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Smith International Inc., Vs Adit, 806-807, Powai Plaza, Central International Taxation, Avenue, Hiranandani Garden, Dehradun Powai, Mumbai-400076 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aahcs3148R

87 ITR 542). Also the scheme of presumptive determination u/s 44BB of the Act was considered by Hon’ble Uttarakhand High Court in the case of CIT vs. Halliburton Offshore Services Inc. (300 ITR 265) it was held that this section is a complete code in itself and provides for taxation of all receipts whether arising in India or outside

SMITH INTERNATIONAL INC.,MUMBAI vs. ADIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed and both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 4561/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 3824/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Smith International Inc., Vs Adit, 806-807, Powai Plaza, Central International Taxation, Avenue, Hiranandani Garden, Dehradun Powai, Mumbai-400076 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aahcs3148R

87 ITR 542). Also the scheme of presumptive determination u/s 44BB of the Act was considered by Hon’ble Uttarakhand High Court in the case of CIT vs. Halliburton Offshore Services Inc. (300 ITR 265) it was held that this section is a complete code in itself and provides for taxation of all receipts whether arising in India or outside

SAEXPLORATION INC INDIA PROJECTS OFFICE,DEHRADUN vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-2, DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

87 ITR 542 (SC) wherein it was laid down that sales tax charged forms part of the trading receipts and is as such liable to be assessed to income tax. The Ld. DR submitted that since then the courts have consistently held similarly for all kinds of taxes or government receipts (that were received by the assessee during the relevant

SHERWATER GEOSERVICES LTD. INDIA PROJECT OFFICE,DEHRADUN vs. AICT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-2, DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

87 ITR 542 (SC) wherein it was laid down that sales tax charged forms part of the trading receipts and is as such liable to be assessed to income tax. The Ld. DR submitted that since then the courts have consistently held similarly for all kinds of taxes or government receipts (that were received by the assessee during the relevant

DCIT, CIRCLE- II, INTL. TAXATION, DEHRADUN vs. R & B FALCON (A) PTY LTD., DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

87 ITR 542 (SC) wherein it was laid down that sales tax charged forms part of the trading receipts and is as such liable to be assessed to income tax. The Ld. DR submitted that since then the courts have consistently held similarly for all kinds of taxes or government receipts (that were received by the assessee during the relevant

DCIT, CIRCLE- II, INTL. TAXATION, DEHRADUN vs. R & B FALCON (A) PTY LTD., DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

87 ITR 542 (SC) wherein it was laid down that sales tax charged forms part of the trading receipts and is as such liable to be assessed to income tax. The Ld. DR submitted that since then the courts have consistently held similarly for all kinds of taxes or government receipts (that were received by the assessee during the relevant

DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION),CIRCLE-2, DEHRADUN vs. TRANSOCEAN OFFSHORE INTERNATIONAL VENTURE LTD., NOIDA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukladr. B.R.R. Kumar

87 ITR 542 (SC) wherein it was laid down that sales tax charged forms part of the trading receipts and is as such liable to be assessed to income tax. The Ld. DR submitted that since then the courts have consistently held similarly for all kinds of taxes or government receipts (that were received by the assessee during the relevant

DCIT, CIRCLE- 1, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, DEHRADUN vs. TRANSOCEAN OFFSHORE DEEPWATER DRILLING INC, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukladr. B.R.R. Kumar

87 ITR 542 (SC) wherein it was laid down that sales tax charged forms part of the trading receipts and is as such liable to be assessed to income tax. The Ld. DR submitted that since then the courts have consistently held similarly for all kinds of taxes or government receipts (that were received by the assessee during the relevant

DCIT, CIRCLE- I, INTL. TAXATION, DEHRADUN vs. DEEPWATER PACIFIC 1 INC., DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

87 ITR 542 (SC) wherein it was laid down that sales tax charged forms part of the trading receipts and is as such liable to be assessed to income tax. The Ld. DR submitted that since then the courts have consistently held similarly for all kinds of taxes or government receipts (that were received by the assessee during the relevant

DCIT, CIRCLE- II, (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), DEHRADUN vs. SUNDOWNER OFFSHORE INTERNATIONAL (BERMUDA) LTD., DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

87 ITR 542 (SC) wherein it was laid down that sales tax charged forms part of the trading receipts and is as such liable to be assessed to income tax. The Ld. DR submitted that since then the courts have consistently held similarly for all kinds of taxes or government receipts (that were received by the assessee during the relevant

DCIT, CIRCLE-II, INTL. TAXATION, DEHRADUN vs. TRITON HOLDINGS LTD., DEHRADUNA

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

87 ITR 542 (SC) wherein it was laid down that sales tax charged forms part of the trading receipts and is as such liable to be assessed to income tax. The Ld. DR submitted that since then the courts have consistently held similarly for all kinds of taxes or government receipts (that were received by the assessee during the relevant

DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION),CIRCLE-2, DEHRADUN vs. TRANSOCEAN OFFSHORE INTERNATIONAL VENTURE LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

87 ITR 542 (SC) wherein it was laid down that sales tax charged forms part of the trading receipts and is as such liable to be assessed to income tax. The Ld. DR submitted that since then the courts have consistently held similarly for all kinds of taxes or government receipts (that were received by the assessee during the relevant

DCIT, CIRCLE-II, INTL. TAXATION, DEHRADUN vs. TRITON HOLDINGS LTD., DEHRADUNA

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

87 ITR 542 (SC) wherein it was laid down that sales tax charged forms part of the trading receipts and is as such liable to be assessed to income tax. The Ld. DR submitted that since then the courts have consistently held similarly for all kinds of taxes or government receipts (that were received by the assessee during the relevant

BG EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION INDIA LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DDIT/ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE -1, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

87,86,76,210/- which was subsequently revised to Rs.289,28,91,520/- on 30th March, 2018. Since the assessee had entered into certain international transactions with its AE, the AO referred the matter to the TPO for determination of the ALP of the international transaction u/s 92CA(3) of the IT Act. The TPO proposed an upward adjustment

MI OVERSEAS LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ADIT, DEHRADUN

In the result ITA number 5584/Del/2013 filed by the assessee for assessment year

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishi

87 taxmann.com 29 (SC)/[2017] 251 Taxman 459 (SC)/[2017] 399 ITR 1 (SC)/[2017] 299 CTR 1 (SC) while deciding the issue of mobilization fees has held that when the contracts are indivisible, it is not appropriate to treat the various receipts of the contract differently. Therefore, material used for performance of contract cannot be treated differently than other

MI OVERSEAS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADIT, DEHRADUN

In the result ITA number 5584/Del/2013 filed by the assessee for assessment year

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishi

87 taxmann.com 29 (SC)/[2017] 251 Taxman 459 (SC)/[2017] 399 ITR 1 (SC)/[2017] 299 CTR 1 (SC) while deciding the issue of mobilization fees has held that when the contracts are indivisible, it is not appropriate to treat the various receipts of the contract differently. Therefore, material used for performance of contract cannot be treated differently than other

ADIT, DEHRADUN vs. M/S. M.I. OVERSEAS LTD., NOIDA

In the result ITA number 5584/Del/2013 filed by the assessee for assessment year

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishi

87 taxmann.com 29 (SC)/[2017] 251 Taxman 459 (SC)/[2017] 399 ITR 1 (SC)/[2017] 299 CTR 1 (SC) while deciding the issue of mobilization fees has held that when the contracts are indivisible, it is not appropriate to treat the various receipts of the contract differently. Therefore, material used for performance of contract cannot be treated differently than other