9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 436X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 422 - DELHI HIGH COURT). The said judgment was followed in the assessment year 2008-09 in the case of PGS Geophysical AS (2014 (7) TMI 723 - DELHI HIGH COURT ). In the light of above judgments held that for the relevant assessment year i.e. 2008-09, the assessee is entitled to declare its income under the provisions of sec. 44BB of the Act. The Learned CIT(Appeals) was thus justified in holding so. - Decided in favour of assessee. Mobilization/demobilization of Vessel outside India - Held that:- In view of the CIT & Another Vs. Atwood Oceanics Pacific Ltd. [2010 (5) TMI 453 - UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT] payments mentioned above, we hold that the revenue of ₹ 2,81,23,166/- arising from mobilization/demobilization of Vessel outside Indi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... axed as fees from technical services. Aggrieved by the proposed variation in its income, the assessee has filed objections before the Dispute Resolution Panel. The Dispute Resolution Panel affirmed the view taken by the assessee. The assessee being aggrieved is in appeal before us raising the following grounds: Addition qua seismic survey operations in connection with exploration/prospecting/extraction of mineral oil 1. That the assessing officer erred on facts and in law in completing assessment under section 144C/143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ( the Act ) at an income of ₹ 527,387,970/- as against the income of ₹ 182,742,870/- returned by the appellant. 2. That the assessing officer erred on facts and in law ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rilling Co. [Uttrakhand High Court] [2009- TII-20-HC-UKHAND-INTL] dated: April 24,2009 3. CIT Vs M/s Sundowner Offshore International Burmuda Ltd [Uttrakhand High Court] [2009-TII-07-UKHAND-INTL] dated February 16, 2009. 4. CIT Vs. M/s BJ Service Co [Uttrakhand High Court] [2007-TII-05- HC-UKHAND-INTL] dated October 8, 2007. 5. CIT Vs. Trans Ocean Offshore Incorporation [High Court of Uttrakhand] [2007-TII-13-HC-Ukhand-INTL] dated October 08, 2007. 6. M/s Sedco Forex International Inc Vs CIT, Meerut [Uttrakhand High Court] [2007 TII-02-HC-UKHAND-INTL] dated September 28, 2007. 7. CIT Vs. M/s Halliburton Offshore Service Inc [Uttrakhand High Court] [2007-TII-04-H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e draft order dated 29.12.2010 passed by him. 5. The Ruling of AAR in the case of Geophzika Torun Sp. Zo.o has been confirmed by the Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of Director of Income Tax-II Vs. OHM Ltd. [2012] 28 taxmann 120 (Del). The said judgment of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Director of Income Tax-II Vs. OHM Ltd. (Supra) was followed by the Hon ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of PGS Geophysical AS (Supra). In the light of the above judgments of Hon ble jurisdictional High Court, we hold that for the relevant assessment year, assessee is entitled to declare its income under the provision of Section 44BB of the Act. It is ordered accordingly. 6. In so far as the second ground namely addition qua ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on [High Court of Uttrakhand] [2007-TII-13-HC-Ukhand-INTL] dated October 08, 2007. 6. M/s Sedco Forex International Inc Vs CIT, Meerut [Uttrakhand High Court] [2007 TII-02-HC-UKHAND-INTL] dated September 28, 2007. 7. CIT Vs. M/s Halliburton Offshore Service Inc [Uttrakhand High Court] [2007-TII-04-HC-UKHAND-INTL] dated September 20, 2007. As the issue of taxation of mobilization and demobilization charges has already been settled by the Hon ble High Court of Uttrakhand favour of revenue in the above cases the assessee has no case and so the order of the Assessing Officer on this issue is in order. As such, this ground of objection is also rejected. 7. In view of the Hon ble Uttrakhand High Court judgme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
