9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 188X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ar 2008-09 against order dated 29.8.2011 of ld CIT(A)-11, Mumbai on following ground: " On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, ld CIT(A) erred in holding that there is no business connection between the Indian company and the foreign company as contemplated in section 9(1)(i) of the Act and no income accrues/arises or is deemed to accrues/arises in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is not liable to tax in India. However, AO treated the Indian company i.e. SCITS as the agent of SCML and estimated the income accruing towards the operations carried out in India of SCML @ 5% of the cruise collections remitted from India. Being aggrieved,assessee filed appeal before ld CIT(A). 4. Ld CIT(A) by following the earlier order dated 5.8.2011 of the Tribunal in assessee's own case for a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... years 2001-02 and 2002-03 in I.T.A. No.4973/M/2005 and I.T.A. No.6497/M/2006 dated 21.12.2009 held that no income accrues or arises to the assessee in India regarding the business of sale of tickets through the sole selling agent and, accordingly, order of ld CIT(A) was confirmed by dismissing the department's appeal. Ld A.R. further referred pages 1 & 2 of PB and submitted that similar issue cam ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al of the department (supra) stating that both the sides are in agreement that the facts and circumstances of the appeal under consideration are mutatis mutandis similar to those already considered and decided by the Tribunal. Respectfully following the earlier orders of the Tribunal (supra) and considering the submissions of ld representatives of parties that facts and issue involved in the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
