In The Commissioner Of Income Tax-9 v. M/S.hazira Marine Engineering &Construction Management Pvt.ltd, the High Court (2008) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Issue: P.C.:- 1.Where the tax on the amount payable to a nonresident party is deducted at source & paid to thedepartment but the amount is paid to the foreignparty in the subsequent year, whether thedisallowance can be made under Section 40(a)(i) ofthe Income Tax Act is the question raised in theappeal.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.564 OF 2008
The Commissioner of Income Tax-9....Appellant
vs.
M/s.Hazira Marine Engineering &Construction Management Pvt.Ltd....Respondent.---
Mr.Suresh Kumar, for Appellant.
CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH & J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATED:15[th] September,2008.
P.C.:-
1.Where the tax on the amount payable to a nonresident party is deducted at source & paid to thedepartment but the amount is paid to the foreignparty in the subsequent year, whether thedisallowance can be made under Section 40(a)(i) ofthe Income Tax Act is the question raised in theappeal. The tribunal relying upon the decision of
ITAT Delhi Bench in the case “JCIT Vs. Modi OlivettiLtd.” has allowed the claim of the assessee. Thelearned Counsel appearing for revenue has fairlystated that the Delhi High Court in the case of “CITVs. Oracle Software India Ltd. reported in (2007)293ITR 353 and in the case of “CIT Vs. Nestle India Ltd.reported in (2005)275 ITR 1” has taken similar view.No case is made out for taking a contrary view. Inthis view of the matter, we see no merit in theappeal. Hence, dismissed.
(D.K.DESHMUKH, J.)
(J.P.DEVADHAR, J.)
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.
EaseValue