9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 217X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unt outstanding as on 31.3.2002 as mentioned in the TDS certificate has been taxed in the A.Y. 2002-03, then there remains no basis for holding that this amount has been left to be taxed in the A.Y. 2003-04 at the time of passing of the original assessment order. Thus, on this ground alone, we find that there cannot be any ‘reason to believe’ for reopening the assessment u/s 147 and taxing the additional revenue which already stands assessed and taxed in the earlier assessment year. Accordingly, the ground raised by the revenue is dismissed. - ITA No. 3428/Del./2011 - - - Dated:- 25-4-2017 - SHRI N.K. SAINI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER For The Revenue : Shri Rajesh Kumar, Sr. DR For The Assessee : Shr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... #8377; 13,71,09,862/- was claimed as not taxable in India as it was claimed that assessee company did not had any PE in terms of Article 5 and therefore, its income cannot be taxed in India in terms of Article 7. It was stated that hire charges were computed on the basis of invoice received by ONGC, because the TDS certificate from ONGC had not been received. The assessment order u/s 143(3) was passed by the Assessing Officer determining the income of the assessee at ₹ 1,42,40,000/- by holding that the assessee had an PE in India and thereby, its receipts was taxed in India and demand of ₹ 80,10,787/- was raised. The TDS credit of ₹ 95,962/- was given by the Assessing Officer which was filed along with the return of income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n of income. Credit to the extent of Pm. 85,55,991/- could not be allowed u/s 143(1). The credit of above TDS would be allowed when the assessee furnishes original 'TDS certificates . The assessee has furnished the original TDS certificates which were got verified from ONGC Mumbai. As per this the revenues earn by the assessee are 15,64,92,615/-. Accordingly, the taxable profit would be 1,56,49,261/-. Resultantly amount of ₹ 1409261/- has escaped assessment. 3. In this manner, the ld. Assessing Officer enhanced the hire charges at ₹ 15,64,92,615/- and tax was computed u/s 44BB @ 10%. 4. Before the Ld. CIT (Appeals) the following facts were brought on record by the assessee:- 5. A letter F No.ACIT(OSD)/R-1/DDN/R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h February, 2007 issued under Section 245 of the Act was received, proposing to adjust the the refund of ₹ 31,25,715/- against the outstanding demand of Maersk Company Limited as agent of A.P.Moller Maersk A/s, A copy of the intimation dated 6th February, 2007 was handed over at the hearing on 8th June, 2010. 5. The Learned CIT(Appeals) after considering the assessee s objections, held that, firstly, the reassessment has been passed without disposing of objections; secondly , there is no reasons to believe that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment; and lastly, the Assessing Officer has accepted the higher figure of received from the ONGC in his order passed u/s 154. Thus, Ld. CIT(A) held that not only the re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essment has been framed is not correct. From the perusal of the said TDS certificate and details of the payment mentioned therein, we find that there is one payment of ₹ 4,64,73,960/- has been mentioned to be relating to 31.03.2002, i.e., pertaining to A.Y. 2002-03. This amount as pointed out by the Ld. Sr. Counsel, stands assessed by the Assessing Officer in the A.Y. 2002-03 in the order passed u/s 143(3) dated 18.10.2004. Once, the amount outstanding as on 31.3.2002 as mentioned in the TDS certificate has been taxed in the A.Y. 2002-03, then there remains no basis for holding that this amount has been left to be taxed in the A.Y. 2003-04 at the time of passing of the original assessment order. Thus, on this ground alone, we find tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
