Calcutta HC reverses ITAT
order and rules in favour of Revenue for AY 1996-97, holds PILCOM as agent of
Non-Resident Cricket Boards in relation to 1996 World Cup receipts; Pursuant to
ICC choosing Pakistan, India and Sri Lanka to co-host the World Cup 1996, a
joint management committee of these three countries (PILCOM)] was formed which
paid guarantee money to cricket associations of various countries and other
sums from bank account in London; While the AO had made an assessment of income
u/s. 147 for all the cricket boards through PILCOM, ITAT had quashed the same
and had held that PILCOM could not be held liable as agent u/s. 163 as the
income had accrued in India and it could not be said to be deemed to have
accrued in India; Referring to Sec. 5 (scope of total income), Sec. 9 (income
deemed to accrue/ arise in India) and Sec. 163 (relating to non-resident
agent), HC holds that ITAT completely misinterpreted the law, remarks that “It
goes without saying that the representative assessee not only represents an
income which has directly arisen or accrued in India but also that which has
indirectly arisen or accrued in this country, through a business connection.”;
Noting that the short title to Sec. 9 describes the income as deemed to accrue
or arise in India, HC clarifies that “Use of this title does not absolve the
representative assessee of the duty to account for any income which has
directly or deemed to have arisen to the non-resident in this country.”
:HC
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Bombay High Court Clarifies Tax Exemption Eligibility for Venture Capital Funds
In a significant ruling, the Bombay High Court has reaffirmed that a Venture Capital Fund (VCF) registered with SEBI is entitled to claim ...
-
Slump sale is transfer of one or more business undertakings for a lump sum consideration, without assigning individual values to the each...
-
A new website launched for TDS related matters www.tdscpc.gov.in TRACES – T DS R econciliation A nalysis and C orrection E nabling S yste...
-
Facts Centrica India Offshore Private Limited (CIO), an Indian Company, is a wholly owned subsidiary of Centrica Plc, UK Centrica Plc a...
-
The Tax Audit season has started and it’s the time when the Assessees rush to their Chartered Accountants (CA) to get their Tax Audit d...
-
SREI Infrastructure Finance Ltd vs. ITSC (Delhi High Court) The assessee entered into a scheme of arrangement u/s 391-394 of the Compani...
-
Facts The taxpayer, a partnership firm, derived income from the business of handling and transport of ship containers, customs clearing a...
-
M/s. Alpha Projects Society P. Ltd vs. DCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad) In AY 2005-06, the assessee made payments to contractors & for professi...
-
01. TDS u/s 194J is required to be done for Royalty also w.e.f 13-7-2006. 02. Royalty had been defined under explanation 2 of se...
-
F.No.354/66/2011-TRU Government of India Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue Central Board of Excise & Customs...
-
M/s. Merilyn Shipping & Transports vs. ACIT (ITAT Visakhapatnam Special Bench) The assessee incurred brokerage expenses of Rs.38....
No comments:
Post a Comment