9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 1775X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aggregating to INR 14,51,797/- from GSPC were includible in the receipts for the purpose of determination of income under section 44BB of the Income-tax Act. The Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the said amount is devoid of any profit element and do not constitute income in the hands of the appellant. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law in holding that the provisions of section 44BB do not apply to provision of barge, without appreciating that the receipts of INR. 340,035,436/- for activity carried out by appellant for L&T is inextricably linked with exploration, exploitation and production of mineral oil and cannot be held to be taxable as royalty in terms of section 9(1)(vi) of the Act." 2. The brief facts relating to first grou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... volved in ground No. 2 are that the assessee claimed that the operations of the vessels/equipments given on hire to L&T were outside India and in international waters. Therefore, their receipts were taxable only in Portugal and not in India as per Article 8 of DTAA between India and Portugal. It was also the submission of the assessee that since the Barge was supplied to L&T to be used ultimately in connection with exploration, extraction and production of mineral oil, the receipts from the supply of barge should have been taxed u/s. 44BB of the Act. Reliance was placed on the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in ONGC vs. CIT (civil appeal No. 731 of 2007). The AO was of the opinion that since the assessee had given specialized vehicle/Vessel/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has been that second leg contracts are also eligible for benefit of tax treatment provided in section 44BB of the Act. This decision of ITAT stood confirmed by the Jurisdictional High Court in ITA No. 36/15 (copy placed on file) after relying on the decision of Apex Court in ONGC vs. CIT, 376 ITR 306. Similar view has been taken by ITAT in the cases of B.J. Services Co. ME Limited (ITA Nos. 3889/Del./2010, 421/Del./2012 and 4831/Del./2012 dated 19.12.16 (copy placed on paper book) and several other decisions. Respectfully following the above decisions of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court and the Tribunal, we decide this issue in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. Accordingly, ground No. 2 raised by the assessee deserves to be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
