The Director Of Income Tax (International Taxation v. M/S.valentine Maritime (Gulf) Limited

itxa96-11+ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.96 OF 2011 AND INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.102 OF 2011 The Director of Income Tax (International Taxation) VersusM/s.Valentine Maritime (Gulf) Limited ..Appellant. ..Respondent. Mr.Suresh Kumar for the appellant.Mr.Hiro Rai with Mr.Subhash Shetty for the respondent. CORAM : J.P. Devadhar &M.S. Sanklecha, JJ. DATE : 16[th] January 2013 P.C. : 1.In these appeals filed by the Revenue for assessment years 2001- 2002 and 2002-2003, following questions of law are proposed for our consideration. a)Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the -ITAT was right in reversing the CIT (A)'s order that assessee had a permanent establishment in India during the accounting period relevant to the assessment year 2002-2003 in respect of the projects executed by the assessee in India ?ITAT was right in reversing the CIT (A)'s order that assessee had a permanent establishment in India during the accounting period relevant to the assessment year 2002-2003 in respect of the projects executed by the assessee in India ? b)Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was right in reserving the finding of CIT (A) who held that the assessee had PE in India relying on the judgment reported in 237 ITR 798 ?Tribunal was right in reserving the finding of CIT (A) who held that the assessee had PE in India relying on the judgment reported in 237 ITR 798 ? c)Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was right in deciding the appeal relying on the appeal of the order passed in AY 2000-2001 when the issue raised and decided by CIT (A) was different ?Tribunal was right in deciding the appeal relying on the appeal of the order passed in AY 2000-2001 when the issue raised and decided by CIT (A) was different ? d)Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was right in confirming the direction given by the CIT (A) to the AO to delete the interest charge under Section 234B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ? Tribunal was right in confirming the direction given by the CIT (A) to the AO to delete the interest charge under Section 234B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ? 2.Counsel on both the sides state that questions (a), (b) and (c) are academic in view of the fact that the amount taxed by the assessing officer under Section 44BB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has been upheld by the Tribunal and, therefore, the questions as raised with regard to permanent establishment in India became infructuous. In this view of the matter, we do not see any reason to entertain questions (a), (b) and (c). 3.In so far as question (d) is concerned, counsel on both the sides state that the issue is covered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee by the decision of this Court in the case of Director of Income Tax (International Taxation) V/s. NGC Network Asia LLC reported in (2009) 313 ITR 187 (Bom). In view of above, we see no reason to entertain question (d). 4. costs. Both the appeals are accordingly dismissed with no order as to (M.S. Sanklecha, J.)(J.P. Devadhar, J.)