Dismissed

The Director of Income -Tax (International Taxation), Mumbai. v. Adsteam Agency (India) Ltd., Mumbai.

Bombay HC15 Apr 2013ITXA/2643/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Income Tax Appeal No. 2643 of 2009, addressed two questions regarding the tax treatment of slot chartering income under an India-UK Tax Treaty and applicable sections of the Income Tax Act, but dismissed the appeal immediately, holding that the issues were already covered by a prior decision of this Court in Balaji Shipping UK Ltd. (2012) 211 Taxman 535.

What did the court decide?

The appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs.

The Director of Income -Tax (International Taxation), Mumbai. Vs… — Income Tax | Bombay HC (2013)

¶1

itxa-2643-09.sxw

¶2

gopi

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶4

INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.2643 OF 2009

¶5

The Director of Income-Tax (International Taxation)

¶6

...Appellant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Adsteam Agency (India) Ltd.

¶9

..Respondent

¶10

Mr. Suresh Kumar for the appellant.

¶11

CORAM : MOHIT S. SHAH, C.J. & M.S. SANKLECHA, J. DATE : 15 April 2013

¶12

P .C.

¶13

In this appeal by the revenue for the assessment year 2001-02 the following substantial questions of law have been raised for our consideration:-

¶14

“1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the income of the assessee by way of slot chartering would form a part of income from operations of ships exempt under Article 9 of the Tax Treaty between India and UK?

¶15

Whether the income of the Respondent on account of slot chartering in India is taxable under Section 44B of the Act?

¶16

Whether the income of the Respondent on account of slot chartering is taxable under normal provisions of the Act, i.e. Sections 28 to 43A?

1 of 2

itxa-2643-09.sxw

gopi

Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT was justified in not following the decision of ITAT “D” Bench, Mumbai in the case of A.P. Moller Maesk Agency India Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT (86 ITD 563)?”

¶21

The Tribunal by the impugned order allowed the respondent assessee's appeal holding that Article 9 of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between India and United Kingdom is applicable. This was by following its decision dated 13 August 2008 in the case of Balaji Shipping (UK) Ltd.

¶22

Being aggrieved, the revenue preferred an appeal from the above order of the Tribunal and this Court in the matter of Director of Income Tax (International Taxation) vs. Balaji Shipping UK Ltd. reported in (2012) 211 Taxman 535, dismissed the appeal of the revenue. The revenue has not pointed out any distinguishing features in this case warranting a different view.

¶23

As the issues raised in the present appeal are covered in favour of the respondent assessee by the decision of this Court in the matter of Balaji Shipping (UK) Ltd. (supra), we see no reason to entertain the proposed questions of law.

¶24

Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs.

¶25

CHIEF JUSTICE

¶26

M.S. SANKLECHA, J.

¶27

2 of 2

The Director of Income -Tax (International Taxation), Mumbai. v. Adsteam Agency (India) Ltd., Mumbai.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Director of Income -Tax (International Taxation), Mumbai. v. Adsteam Agency (India) Ltd., Mumbai.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr. Firoz Dhondilal Tamboli Vs Division Controller, M.S.R.T.C.

Mrs. Gulshan Gobindram Sahni Vs Mrs. Tripti Manish Sahni

Mr. Firoz Dhondilal Tamboli Vs Division Controller, M.S.R.T.C.

Zaheer Karim Dhanani and 2 Ors. Vs Meherangiz Jigar Rangoonwala and Anr.

Walchandnagar Industries Limited Vs Hpcl Bio-Fuels Limited and 3 Ors.

Commissioner of Income Tax Central III Mumbai Vs Ness Technologies (India) Pvt. Ltd.