THE ADIT (IT)-2(2), MUMBAI V. M/S. UHDE GmbH, MUMBAI

ITA 414/MUM/2008

• Counselvise Citation: 41419914 RSA 2008
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 7 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-09-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: L
• Next Hearing Date: 08-06-2011
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 17-01-2008
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHANTAM BOSE
• Assessee Lawyers: SANDEEP CHETIWAL
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES, L, MUMBAI BEFORE S/SHRI D.K.AGARWAL (JM) AND R.K.PANDA (A.M ) ITA NO. 414/MUM/2008 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2003-04) ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), 2(2), ROOM NO.116, SCINDIA HOUSE, BALLARD ESTATE, N.M.ROAD, MUMBAI-400038. M/S UHDE GMBH C/O UHDE INDIA LTD., UHDE HOUSE, LBS MARG, VIKHROLI, MUMBAI-400083 PAN: AAACUO565H APPELLANT V/S RESPONDENT DATE OF HEARING : 14.9.2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 14.9.2011 APPELLANT BY : SHRI SHANTAM BOSE RESPONDENT BY : S/SHRI M.M.GOLVALA AND SANDEEP C HETIWAL O R D E R PER D.K.AGARWAL (JM) THIS APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 6.10.2007 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04. 2. THE EFFECTIVE GROUND TAKEN BY THE REVENUE READ S AS UNDER: 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN HOLDING THAT TH E AMOUNT OF RS.6,69,643/- RECEIVED FOR SUPERVISION DU RING START-UP AND COMMISSIONING IS NOT CHARGEABLE TO TAX AS THERE IS NO PE OF THE ASSESSEE IN INDIA DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. ITA NO. 414/MUM/2008 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2003-04) 2 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, IT WAS OBSERVED THAT THE TAX EFFECT ON THE ABOVE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS LESS THAN THE MONETARY LIMIT OF RS.3,00,000/- FIXED BY THE CB DT. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE DID NOT DISPUTE ON THE SAID FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE. THE LEARNED COUNS EL FOR THE ASSESSEE ALSO SUBMITS THAT THE IMPUGNED ISSUE IS C OVERED BY THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN ADIT(IT) V/S M/S KRUPP UHDE GMBH AND VICE VERSA IN ITA NOS.4496/MUM/2005 AND 4652/MUM/2005 (AY-2001-02) DA TED 28.1.2010. 4 AFTER HEARING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE RIVAL PARTI ES AND PERUSING THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND KEEP ING IN VIEW THE RECENT CBDT INSTRUCTION NO. 3 OF 2011 DATE D 9 TH FEBRUARY, 2011 REPORTED IN (2011) 332 ITR 1 (STATUT ES) AND THE RATIO OF THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTI ONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V. MADHUKAR K. INAMDAR (HU F) (2009) 318 ITR 148(BOM), WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD T HAT THE REVISED MONETARY LIMIT IN THE CIRCULAR DATED MAY 15 , 2008 WOULD BE APPLICABLE FOR ALL PENDING APPEALS AND ALS O THE CONSISTENT VIEW OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCHES OF THE TRIBUNAL, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE DEPARTMENT SHOULD NOT H AVE FILED THE APPEAL AND ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ITA NO. 414/MUM/2008 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2003-04) 3 5. IN THE RESULT, THE REVENUES APPEAL STANDS DISM ISSED AS NOT MAINTAINABLE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 14.9.2011 SD SD (R.K.PANDA) (D.K.AGARWAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED 14TH SEPTEMBER, 2011 SRL: COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT CONCERNED 4. CIT(A) CONCERNED 5. DR CONCERNED BENCH 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER TRUE COPY ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI