9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 343X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ur applications have been filed by one Corpro Systems Limited, UK. We shall use the facts in Application No. 1131 only as all the facts about the activity of the applicant are similar, if not identical. It is stated as it is the claim of the applicant company that it is a tax resident of United Kingdom ('UK') and is engaged in rendering coring services/providing coring equipments/ and other associated services to global oil & gas companies. It is apparent from the further facts that one Schlumberger Asia Services Limited ('SASL'), Schlumberger Solutions Private Limited ('SSPL') and Dowell Schlumberger International Inc. ('DSI') formed a consortium and this consortium has entered into a contract with Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Limited ('O ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... raft, vehicles, drilling units, scientific apparatus and equipments, used for the purpose of the said business. The facts in the other three applications are similar, if not identical to the above stated facts. There is no dispute over the nature of service provided by the applicant in all these four applications and it suggests that the said activities are clearly covered under Section 44BB. The learned counsel Shri Abhimanyu Jhamba points out that the question involved is no more res integra as it is directly covered by the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 731 of 2007 dated 1.7.2015 in case of ONGC Ltd. Vs. CIT & Another. The learned counsel has taken us through the judgment of the Supreme Court in which the Hon'ble ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t take note of the objection raised by Shri Chatterjee, the learned representative of the Department. He says that out of the 4 contracts, 2 of the contracts were the sub-contracts and, therefore, they amount to a second level contract and, therefore, there will be no application of the ruling. The objection is clearly unsustainable as the Section 44BB is activity centric and not agreement centric. If under any agreement, whether by a contractor or a sub-contractor an activity covered under Section 44BB is undertaken, the requirement of the application of section 44B is complete, therefore, this objection has no basis. 8. We, therefore, are of the opinion that the questions raised in all 4 applications would be required to be answered in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
