DDIT, New Delhi v. M/s Galileo International Inc., Gurgaon

ITA 2972/DEL/2010 | 2000-2001
Pronouncement Date: 17-03-2011 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 297220114 RSA 2010
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITA 2972/DEL/2010
Duration Of Justice 9 month(s) 3 day(s)
Appellant DDIT, New Delhi
Respondent M/s Galileo International Inc., Gurgaon
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 17-03-2011
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted C
Tribunal Order Date 17-03-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 17-03-2011
Next Hearing Date 17-03-2011
Assessment Year 2000-2001
Appeal Filed On 14-06-2010
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH C NEW DELHI) (DELHI BENCH C NEW DELHI) (DELHI BENCH C NEW DELHI) (DELHI BENCH C NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI I. P. BANSAL JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.K. GARODIA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO.2971-2974 /DEL/2010 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 1999-2000 TO 2002-03 DDIT CIRCLE 1(2) VS. M/S. GALILEO INTERNATIONAL I NC. (INTL. TAX.) C/O BSR & CO. C.A.S NEW DELHI 4B DLF CORPORATE PARK DLF CITY PHASE III GURGAON-122002 C.O. NO.4-7/DEL/2011 (ASSESSMENT YEARS 199-2000 TO 2002-03) M/S. GALILEO INTERNATIONAL INC. VS. DDIT CIRCLE 1 (2) C/O BSR & CO. C.A.S 4B DLF CORPORATE PARK NEW DE LHI DLF CITY PHASE III GURGAON - 122002 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN /GIR/NO. PAN /GIR/NO. PAN /GIR/NO. PAN /GIR/NO.AABCG AABCG AABCG AABCG- -- -7186 7186 7186 7186- -- -R RR R APPELLANT BY : SHRI ASHWANI KUMAR MAHAJAN CIT DR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI FAROOKH V. IRANI ADVOCATE ORDER ORDER ORDER ORDER PER PER PER PER BENCH: BENCH: BENCH: BENCH: 1. ALL THESE FOUR APPEALS BY THE REVENUE AND FOUR CROSS OBJECTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE COMB INED ORDER OF LD. CIT(A)- XXIX NEW DELHI DATED 11.02.20 10 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 1999-2000 TO 2002-03. FOR THE SAKE OF PAGE 2 OF 4 ITA NOS.2971-74../DEL/2010 C.O. NO.4-7/DEL/2011 CONVENIENCE ALL THESE APPEALS AND CROSS OBJECTIONS ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY THIS COMMON ORDER. 2. AT THE OUTSET IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN ALL THESE APPEALS OF TH E REVENUE AND THE CROSS OBJECTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE SQUARE LY COVERED BY THE TRIBUNAL ORDER IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE WHI CH HAS BEEN UPHELD BY THE HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT. IT IS SUBMITTED BY HIM THAT AS PER THE TRIBUNAL DECISION AN D HON'BLE HIGH COURT JUDGMENT ALL THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE AND CROSS OBJECTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED. 3. IT IS SUBMITTED BY HIM THAT IN THE PRESENT CASE IN ALL THESE FOUR YEARS THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE WAS ASSESSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE BASIS OF GROSS BROKING FEE EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE COMPANY AFTER ALLOWING DEDUCTION ON ACCOUN T OF COMMISSION NETWORK EXPENDITURE AND DATA PROCESSING FEE. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 1995-96 TO 1998-99 SIMILAR ISSUE IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE WAS DECIDED BY THE TRIBUNAL AND IT WAS HELD THAT ONLY 15% OF THE REVENU E GENERATED FOR THE BOOKING MADE WITHIN INDIA CAN BE CONSIDERED AS ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE PE IN INDIA AND HEN CE ONLY 15% OF THE REVENUE GENERATED FROM THE BOOKING MADE WITHIN INDIA IS TAXABLE IN INDIA. IT WAS ALSO HELD BY THE T RIBUNAL THAT SINCE THE PAYMENT TO THE AGENTS IN INDIA IS MORE THAN WHAT IS THE INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE PE IN INDIA IT EXTI NGUISHES THE ASSESSMENT AS NO FURTHER INCOME IS TAXABLE IN INDIA. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT IN THE PRESENT FOUR YEARS ALSO THE EXPEN SES INCURRED AND ALLOWED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS MORE TH AN 15% OF GROSS REVENUE GENERATED FROM BOOKINGS MADE WITH IN INDIA AND HENCE NO INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE IS TAXABLE IN INDIA FOR THESE FOUR YEARS ALSO. PAGE 3 OF 4 ITA NOS.2971-74../DEL/2010 C.O. NO.4-7/DEL/2011 4. REGARDING VARIOUS GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE C ROSS OBJECTIONS RELATING TO EXISTENCE OF BUSINESS CONNECTIONS IN INDIA AND ACCRUAL AND ARISING OF INCOME IN INDIA AND THE DEEMED ACCRUAL AND DEEMED ARISING OF INCOME IN INDIA AND EXISTENCE OF PE IN INDIA ETC. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT T HESE ISSUES WERE DECIDED BY THE TRIBUNAL AGAINST THE ASSESSEE IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 1995-96 TO 1998-9. HE SUBMITTED A COPY OF TRIBUNAL DECISION IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THESE ASSESSMENT YEARS 1995-96 TO 1998-99 IN I.T.A. NOS. 1733/D/2001 2473- 2475/D/2000 AND 820-823/D/2005 AND C.O. NO.47 TO 54/D/2006 DATED 30.11.2007. IT IS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT AGAINST THIS TRIBUNAL ORDER BOTH THE ASSESSEE AND REVENUE WERE IN APPEAL BEFORE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI. IT IS SUB MITTED THAT REVENUES APPEALS WERE DISMISSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COU RT OF DELHI IN ITS JUDGMENT DATED 25.02.2009 IN I.T.A. NOS. 851- 860/2008 AND IT WAS HELD BY HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT THAT NO QUESTION OF LAW ARISES IN THIS MATTER WHICH NEEDS FURTHE R DETERMINATION BY THIS COURT. IT IS ALSO SUBMITTED THA T IN THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IT WAS HELD BY THE HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT THAT IN VIEW OF THE DISMISSAL OF APPEALS OF THE REVENUE THE QUESTION RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THESE APPEALS HAVE BECOME ACADEMIC AND ARE THEREFORE DISMISSED. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THIS JUDGEMENT OF HON'BLE HIGH COURT O F DELHI IN RESPECT OF ASSESSEES APPEALS IS ALSO DATED 25.02.2009 IN I.T.A. NOS. 17408 17409 17437 1743817473-74 1746 9-70 17410 17439 AND 17471-72/2008. HE SUBMITTED A COPY OF BOTH THESE JUDGMENTS OF HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI R ENDERED IN THE ASSESSEES APPEALS AS WELL AS REVENUES APPEALS. LD. DR ALSO AGREED THAT THESE ISSUES ARE COVERED AS PER THESE JUDGEMENTS. PAGE 4 OF 4 ITA NOS.2971-74../DEL/2010 C.O. NO.4-7/DEL/2011 5. WE HAVE CONSIDRED THE ABOVE FACTUAL AND LEGAL POSITIO N AND WE FIND THAT ONLY ONE ISSUE IS INVOLVED IN THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE THAT WHETHER THE LD. CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN HOLDING THAT ONLY 15% OF THE REVENUE IS INCOME ACCRUING/ARISI NG IN INDIA. WE FIND THAT THIS ASPECT OF MATTER HAS BEEN D ECIDED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 1995-96 TO 1998-99 AND LD. CIT(A) HAS FOLLOWED THIS T RIBUNAL DECISION ONLY. THIS TRIBUNAL DECISION IN EARLIER YEA RS HAD BEEN UPHELD BY THE HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT AND HENCE T HESE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE DO NOT SURVIVE BECAUSE THIS ISSUE IS NOW COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE TRIBUNAL DECISION AS WELL AS BY THE JUDGEMENT OF HON'BLE HIGH C OURT OF DELHI AFFIRMING THE TRIBUNAL DECISION. SIMILARLY T HE ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE CROSS OBJECTIONS ARE COVERED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE BY THE SAME TRIBUNAL DECISION AND TH E JUDGMENT OF HON'BLE HIGH COURT AND HENCE THESE APPE ALS OF THE REVENUE AND CROSS OBJECTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE LIAB LE TO BE DISMISSED. WE DISMISS THE SAME. 6. IN THE RESULT ALL THE FOUR APPEALS OF THE REVENUE AS WELL AS ALL THE FOUR CROSS OBJECTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. 7. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17 TH MARCH 2011. SD/- SD./- (I. P. BANSAL) (A.K. GA RODIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DT. 17 TH MARCH 2011. SP. COPY FORWARDED TO:- 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT (A)- NEW DELHI.