9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (2) TMI 1353 - AT - Income TaxBusiness connection in India u/s 9(1)(i) - profits attributable to India - attribution of taxable income to the so called business connection in India - HELD THAT - This decision has been reiterated by the Tribunal in A.Y. 2008-09 vide order dated 21.05.2014 2014 (5) TMI 1209 - ITAT MUMBAI Thus, without going into other decision of the Tribunal as cited by Ld. DR, we respectfully following the judicial precedence of the earlier years, decide this issue in favour of the assessee by holding that the assessee s income from transportation agreement cannot be taxed in India under the deeming provision of section 9(1)(i) as USIPL cannot be said to constitute business connection in India. Accordingly, Ground No. 1 as raised by the assessee stands allowed.
Issues involved:
1. Taxability of business connection in India under section 9(1)(i) 2. Merits of attributing taxable income to the business connection in India 3. Disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) for alleged non-withholding of tax 4. Adoption of net global profitability percentage for calculating income attributable to business income in India Analysis: Issue 1: Taxability of business connection in India under section 9(1)(i) The main contention was whether the assessee had a business connection in India, specifically regarding the subsidiary USIPL. The assessee argued that previous Tribunal decisions supported their position, emphasizing that the High Court did not admit the department's appeal on this specific question. On the other hand, the Revenue argued that the Tribunal's decision contradicted an earlier ruling by the ITAT Mumbai Bench. The assessing officer held that USIPL's activities in India were on behalf of the assessee, constituting a business connection. However, the Tribunal, based on previous decisions and legal interpretations, concluded that the income from the transportation agreement with USIPL could not be taxed in India under section 9(1)(i), as USIPL did not establish a business connection in India. Issue 2: Merits of attributing taxable income to the business connection in India The assessee challenged the attribution of taxable income to the alleged business connection in India. However, since the Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee on the first issue, finding no business connection in India, the grounds related to the attribution of income were deemed academic and treated as infructuous. Issue 3: Disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) for alleged non-withholding of tax The assessee contested the disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) for a payment made to USIPL due to alleged non-withholding of tax under section 194C. However, this issue became irrelevant following the Tribunal's decision on the first issue, rendering the disallowance grounds academic and infructuous. Issue 4: Adoption of net global profitability percentage for calculating income attributable to business income in India The assessee also challenged the adoption of net global profitability percentage for calculating the income attributable to the alleged business income in India. However, this challenge was intertwined with the previous issues and became moot after the Tribunal's decision on the primary issue of the existence of a business connection in India. In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the Assessee based on the finding that the income from the transportation agreement with USIPL was not taxable in India under section 9(1)(i) due to the absence of a business connection. The other issues raised by the assessee regarding income attribution and tax disallowance were considered academic and infructuous in light of the primary determination.
|
