9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 947X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Senior Standing Counsel JUDGMENT Badar Durrez Ahmed, J (Oral) 1. This writ petition pertains to the assessment year 2004-05. The notice under section 148 dated 28.03.2011 and proceedings pursuant thereto including the order rejecting the objections dated 01.11.2011 are under challenge in this petition. 2. The original assessment under Section 143(3) was completed on 22.12.2006. 3. We have he ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essment. 4. Reliance has been placed by the learned counsel on the decision of this court in Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Co. Vs. CIT (2009) 308 ITR (Delhi). In that case, this court had observed as under: "In the reasons supplied to the petitioner, there is no whisper, what to speak of any allegation, that the petitioner had failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aking action after the said four year period remains unfulfilled. In our recent decision in Wel Intertrade P. Ltd. (2009) 308 ITE 22(Delhi) we had agreed with the view taken by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Duli Chand Singania (2004) 269 ITR 192 (P&H) that, in the absence of an allegation in the reasons recorded that the escapement of income had occurred by reason of failure on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as been held to be the PE of the assessee in India. The royalty was paid at 15%. The assessee company is earning royalties in India linked to the PE. Therefore, this royalty income must be taxed @ 20% gross instead of 15%. Further, the royalty income offered by the assessee includes Rs. 11,064,710 towards the interest on delayed royalty which should be taxed at 41.82 percent. " 7. It is be evide ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
