Saipem (Portugal) Comercio Maritimo Su lda, New Delhi V. DDIT, Dehradun

ITA 2916/DEL/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 135 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7503 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-08-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 10-06-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: Y K KAKKAR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH G: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI I.P. BANSAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.C. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 2916/DEL/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 SAIPEM (PORTUGAL) COMERCIO MARITIMO SU IDA, C/O NANGIA & CO., SUITE 4A, PLAZA M-6, JASOLA, NEW DELHI. AAICS0784N VS. DDIT, INTL. TAXATION, DEHRADUN. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NEERAJ SHARMA, CA RESPONDENT BY: Y.K. KAKKAR, SR. DR O R D E R PER I.P. BANSAL, J.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. IT IS D IRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) DATED 16.2.10 FOR A.Y. 2006-07. GROUNDS OF APPEAL READ AS UNDER: - 1. THE LD. CIT(A), DEHRADUN (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS CIT(A)) HAS ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE ORDER OF THE AO THAT REIMBURSEMENT RE VENUE OF RS. 158,883,269 ON ACCOUNT OF EXPENDITURE INCURRED ON BEHALF OF CUS TOMERS, IS INCLUDIBLE IN THE AGGREGATE AMOUNT REFERRED TO IN SUB-SECTION (2) OF SEC. 44BB OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. YOUR APPELLANT PRAYS THAT THE ERRONEOUS ORDER BE CA NCELLED AND APPROPRIATE RELIEF MAY BE GRANTED TO THE APPELLANT. YOUR APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD TO, ALTER, AMEND , VARY, OMIT, SUBSTITUTE OR DELETE ANY OF THE AFOREMENTIONED GROUNDS OF APPEAL OR ADD A NEW GROUND OR GROUNDS OF APPEAL AT ANY TIME BEFORE OR AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL. 2 ITA NO. 2916/DEL/2010 2. THE ISSUE HAS BEEN DECIDED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE BY THE LD. CIT(A). FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. HALLIBURTON OFFSHORE SERVICES INC. REPORTED IN 300 ITR 265, WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES IS INCLUDIBLE I N THE REVENUE AS CONTEMPLATED BY SEC. 44BB OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 (AC T). THE SUBMISSION OF THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE CIT(A) WAS THAT THE SAID DECISION OF HONBLE HIGH COURT HAS BEEN CHALLENGED BEFORE HONBLE SUPRE ME COURT AND, THEREFORE, THE ISSUE IS UNDER LITIGATION. LD. CIT(A) HAS DECI DED THIS ISSUE AGAINST THE ASSESSEE FOLLOWING THE AFOREMENTIONED DECISION OF H ONBLE HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. HALLIBURTON OFFSHORE SERVICES INC. (SUPRA). 3. IN THIS VIEW OF THE SITUATION, AFTER HEARING BOT H THE PARTIES, WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE ISSUE DECIDED BY LD. CIT(A) AS THE SAME IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DECISION OF HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT I N THE CASE OF CIT VS. HALLIBURTON OFFSHORE SERVICES INC. (SUPRA). WE, TH EREFORE, DECLINE TO INTERFERE AND THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11.08.10 (B.C. MEENA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (I.P. BANSAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 11.8.10 *KAVITA 3 ITA NO. 2916/DEL/2010 COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, NEW DELHI. TRUE COPY BY ORDER DEPUTY REGISTRAR