9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
- Interpretation of provisions of section 92 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 regarding business dealings between a resident and a non-resident company. - Application of section 92 to determine profits derived from business transactions between a wholly owned subsidiary and its non-resident parent company. - Assessment of income based on commission income and sales turnover. - Comparison of commission rates with another Indian company to establish reasonableness. - Consideration of expenses incurred by the assessee in relation to income generated. - Examination of the Assessing Officer's decision to invoke section 92. Analysis: The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai involved revenue's appeals against two separate orders of the CIT(A) for assessment years 1997-98 and 1998-99. The common issue in both appeals was the application of section 92 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The revenue contended that the Assessing Officer was justified in invoking section 92 due to the close business connection between the assessee-company and its non-resident parent company, resulting in a loss. The revenue argued for assessing income based on a percentage of commission income and sales turnover. The assessee, on the other hand, argued that the provisions of section 92 were not applicable as the commission rates were reasonable and had been revised after discussions with the non-resident company. The assessee provided evidence of commission rates with another Indian company to support the reasonableness of the rates charged. The Assessing Officer's decision was challenged based on the lack of abnormal expenses that would warrant disallowance. The Tribunal analyzed the provisions of section 92, emphasizing the requirement that business dealings must produce either no profit or less than ordinary profits to invoke the section. The Tribunal noted that the assessee had a close connection with the non-resident company but found no evidence to suggest that the business arrangement resulted in no profit or less than ordinary profits. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision in favor of the assessee, highlighting the lack of justification for invoking section 92 and the reasonable nature of the commission rates agreed upon. Ultimately, the Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeals, concluding that there was no basis to interfere with the CIT(A)'s order regarding the application of section 92 and the assessment of income. The judgment clarified the interpretation of section 92 in the context of business transactions between a resident and a non-resident company, emphasizing the need to establish a lack of profit or below-average profits to invoke the section.
|
