M/S Atwood Oceanics Pacific Limited v. The Deputy Director Of Income-Tax, (Intt. Taxation), Dehradun

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Income Tax Appeal No. 17 of 2012 M/s Atwood Oceanics Pacific Limited C/o NANGIA & CO Suite-4A, Plaza-M 6, Jasola, New Delhi – 110025 ………….. Appellant Versus The Deputy Director of Income-tax, (Intt. Taxation), Dehradun ………….. Respondent Present: Mr. S.K. Posti, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Hari Mohan Bhatia, Advocate for the respondent. JUDGMENT Date: 8thAugust, 2012 Coram : Hon’ble Barin Ghosh, C.J.Hon’ble U.C. Dhyani, J. BARIN GHOSH, C.J. (Oral) In this appeal two questions have been raised. The first of them is, whether mobilization charges received by the appellant on account of mobilization of the rig out side India were to be included in calculating the aggregate amount referred to in sub-section (2) of section 44BB of the Income-tax Act, 1961? 2. A similar question has been decided against the assessee by this Court in Sedco Forex International Inc. versus Commissioner of Income-tax and another, reported in [2008] 299 ITR 238. We, accordingly, answer the said question raised in the present appeal against the assessee following the aforementioned judgment of this Court. 3. The other question raised in the present appeal is, whether reimbursement of actual expenses received by the appellant from M/s Gujarat State Petroleum Corporation Limited were to be included in calculating the aggregate amount referred to in sub-section (2) of section 44BB of the Income-tax Act, 1961? 4. This question has also been answered against the assessee by this Court in Commissioner of Income-tax and another versus Halliburton Offshore Services Inc., reported in [2008] 300 ITR 265. We, accordingly, answer the said question also against the assessee by following the said judgment of this Court and, accordingly, dispose of the appeal. P. Singh (U.C. Dhyani, J.) (Barin Ghosh, C.J.) 08.08.2012