Income Tax Appeal v. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal
High Court
05 Sep 2005 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · ukhcucis_pg
Parties
Income Tax Appeal v. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal
Date of order
05 Sep 2005
Assessment year(s)
1997-98
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Income Tax Appeal v. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, the High Court (2005) dismissed the appeal.
Decision: Following the above-mentioned judgment of a Division Bench of this Court, this appeal is dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL
Income Tax Appeal No. 28 of 2004
M/s B. J. Services Co. Middle East, as agent of Mr. Jayachander, Vikas Centre, 2[nd] Floor, S.V. Road, Santacruz (W) Mumbai. ……Appellant
Versus
1. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
Delhi Bench ‘D’ New Delhi.
2. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Dehradun. Dehradun.
3. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Circle, Dehradun Special Circle, Dehradun
…Respondents
Mr. V.K. Bist, Senior Advocate for the appellant. Mr. S.K.Posti, Advocate for the respondents.
Coram: Hon. Cyriac Joseph, C.J. Hon. J.C.S. Rawat, J.
JUDGMENT
CYRIAC JOSEPH, C.J. (Oral)
1. This appeal is filed against the order dated 03.02.2004 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench ‘D’, New Delhi in I.T.A. No. 50 to 81/Del/2000. The appellant is the assessee. The dispute relates to the Assessment Year 1997-98.
2. The substantial question of law raised in the appeal is as follows:
“Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Tribunal is legally justified in treating the amount paid for the “off period” as the income earned in India in view of the explanation to section 9(1)(ii) while admittedly no service has been rendered during off period in India and inasmuch as, the subsequent amendment made in the explanation w.e.f. 01.04.2000 shows that the amount paid for “off period” or leave period is regarded as the income accrued in India only w. e. f. 01.04.2000?”
3. In Commissioner of Income Tax and another Vs. SEDCO Forex International Drilling Co. Ltd. and connected cases reported in (2003) 264 ITR 320, a Division Bench of this Court held that the payment of salary for “off period” was income earned in India, i.e for services rendered in India under Section 9(1)(ii) and that “off period salary” was taxable under section 9(1)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
4. Following the above-mentioned judgment of a Division Bench of this Court, this appeal is dismissed.
G
(J.C.S. Rawat, J.) (Cyriac Joseph, C.J.) 13.09.2005 13.09.2005
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.