Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi
Galileo International Inc., New Delhi vs Department Of Income Tax on 11 February, 2010
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
(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 Inc.,
(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 Delhi
DLF City, Phase III, Gurgaon - 122002
(Appellant) (Respondent)
PAN /GIR/No.AABCG
/GIR/No.AABCG-
AABCG-7186-
7186-R
Appellant by : Shri Ashwani Kumar Mahajan, CIT DR
Respondent by : Shri Farookh V. Irani, Advocate
ORDER
PER BENCH:
1. All these four appeals by the revenue and four cross objections of the assessee are directed against the combined order of Ld. CIT(A)- XXIX, New Delhi dated 11.02.2010 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 the revenue and the cross objections of the assessee are squarely covered by the tribunal order in assessee's own case which has been upheld by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court. It is submitted by him that as per the tribunal decision and 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 account of commission network expenditure and data processing fee. It is submitted that in assessment year 1995-96 to 1998-99, similar issue in assessee's own case was decided by the tribunal and it was held that only 15% of the revenue generated for the booking made within India can be considered as attributable to the PE in India and hence only 15% of the revenue generated from the booking made within India is taxable in India. It was also held by the tribunal that since the payment to the agents in India is more than what is the income attributable to the PE in India, it extinguishes the assessment as no further income is taxable in India. It is submitted that in the present four years also the expenses incurred and allowed by the Assessing Officer is more than 15% of gross revenue generated from bookings made within 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 cross 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 these 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 assessee's 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 submitted that revenue's appeals were dismissed by the Hon'ble High Court 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 further determination by this court. It is also submitted that in the assessee's 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 of Delhi in respect of assessee's appeals is also dated 25.02.2009 in I.T.A. Nos. 17408, 17409, 17437, 1743817473-74, 17469-70, 17410, 17439 and 17471-72/2008. He submitted a copy of both these judgments of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi rendered in the assessee's appeals as well as revenue's appeals. Ld. DR also agreed that these issues are covered as per these judgements.
Page 4 of 4ITA Nos.2971-74../Del/2010 C.O. No.4-7/Del/2011
5. We have considred the above factual and legal position 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/arising in India. We find that this aspect of matter has been decided by the Tribunal in the assessee's own case in assessment year 1995-96 to 1998-99 and Ld. CIT(A) has followed this tribunal decision only. This tribunal decision in earlier years had been upheld by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court and hence, these 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 Court of Delhi affirming the tribunal decision. Similarly, the issue raised by the assessee in the cross objections are covered against the assessee by the same tribunal decision and the judgment of Hon'ble High Court and hence, these appeals of the revenue and cross objections of the assessee are liable 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 17th March, 2011.
Sd/- Sd./- (I. P. BANSAL) (A.K. GARODIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dt. 17th March, 2011. Sp. Copy forwarded to:- 1. The appellant 2. The respondent 3. The CIT 4. The CIT (A)-, New Delhi.