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>Court upholds Commissioner's decision to reject waiver application under Income Tax Act despite petitioner's hardship claims.</h1> <h3>Pioneer Overseas Corporation Usa (India Branch) Versus Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation) - 2 Delhi</h3> Pioneer Overseas Corporation Usa (India Branch) Versus Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation) - 2 Delhi - TMI Issues:1. Application for waiver of interest under Section 220 (2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was rejected by the Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation) on the ground of failure to show genuine hardship.Analysis:1. The petitioner, a branch office of a US corporation engaged in Contract Research Activities, sought to quash the order rejecting its application for waiver of interest under Section 220 (2) of the Income Tax Act. The background revealed a dispute regarding the classification of income as agricultural or business, leading to tax assessments and appeals.2. The Assessing Officer treated the petitioner as a Permanent Establishment, attributing income from research activities. Appeals resulted in partial relief, with a portion of income classified as agricultural. Subsequent proceedings involved transfer pricing methods and Mutual Agreement Procedure under the India-US Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement.3. The petitioner applied for waiver of interest under Section 220 (2A) citing genuine hardship, cooperation in proceedings, and circumstances beyond control. The rejection by the Commissioner was challenged, arguing that the petitioner met the conditions for waiver and citing relevant legal precedents.4. The court considered the conditions under Section 220 (2A) for waiver, emphasizing genuine hardship, circumstances beyond control, and cooperation. The petitioner's argument that interest payment and bank guarantee costs exceeded the tax amount was countered by the Commissioner's assessment of the petitioner's financial position within the global conglomerate.5. The court upheld the Commissioner's decision, noting the petitioner's minimal interest payment compared to the conglomerate's profits. The court found the Commissioner's conclusion on genuine hardship reasonable, leading to the dismissal of the writ petition without costs.This detailed analysis covers the issues raised in the legal judgment, outlining the background, arguments presented, relevant legal principles, and the court's decision in a comprehensive manner.
TaxTMI 