TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal Grants Stay on Recovery, Assessee Required to Pay Rs. 50 Crores</h1> <h3>Tata Communications Ltd. Versus Addl. CIT</h3> Tata Communications Ltd. Versus Addl. CIT - TMI Issues:Stay of recovery of outstanding demand of Rs. 285,64,83,217.Analysis:1. The assessee, a company providing various telecommunication services, filed a return of income for the assessment year 2007-08, initially declaring a total income of Rs. 427,72,07,814, later revised to Rs. 441,91,76,049. The revenue made several disallowances and adjustments, leading to an outstanding demand of Rs. 285,64,83,218. The major disallowances included u/s. 80IA and transfer pricing adjustments.2. Regarding the disallowance u/s. 80IA, the assessee claimed deductions for internet and national long distance services undertakings. The revenue disallowed the claim stating that the deductions were not applicable as the company commenced operations before 1995. The assessee argued that the undertakings were separate entities eligible for deductions, supported by investments and employment details, challenging the AO's reliance on a Special Bench decision.3. The transfer pricing adjustments were made for international telecommunication services. The assessee contended that mark-up on pass-through costs was incorrect as no value-added services were provided on those costs. They highlighted global pricing regulations, the nature of their services under the ILD license, and the Delhi ITAT's decision on mark-ups.4. The Tribunal found a prima facie case in favor of the assessee on both issues. Dissenting views in the Special Bench decision and the Delhi ITAT's ruling supported the assessee's arguments. Considering the substantial outstanding demand, the Tribunal granted a stay subject to the condition of paying Rs. 50 crores by a specified date, with the appeal scheduled for an expedited hearing.5. The Tribunal balanced the assessee's prima facie case, convenience, and financial hardship, leading to the decision to grant a stay on recovery, acknowledging the debatable nature of the issues and the substantial impact on the assessee's financial position. The stay was contingent upon the partial payment of the outstanding demand and adherence to procedural requirements for the upcoming appeal hearing.
TaxTMI 