TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2005 (11) TMI 382
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iving ground of appeal. 2. The CIT(A) erred in failing to give a clear order on non-applicability of section 44D to our case while at the same time holding that the appeal is partly allowed. 3. The CIT(A) erred in following his own order passed for the earlier years upholding the applicability of section 44D to the facts of the appellant's case, thus totally failing to take cognizance of crucial developments subsequent to the date of passing orders for earlier years. 3.1 The CIT(A) erred in not taking cognizance of the developments even after the same was brought to his notice. 3.2 As a result of the above, the CIT(A) has grossly erred in holding that the grounds of protective assessment are not required to be adjudicated upon. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Assessing Officer. The order of the CIT(A) was passed in haste without considering relevant material and, therefore, deserves to be set aside. 9. The CIT(A) erred in totally failed to consider the detailed evidence submitted in remand proceedings, in the form of vouchers, books of account, agreements etc., for verification, and in holding that the grounds dealing with disallowance made in protective assessment need not be adjudicated upon. 10. The order of the CIT(A) is predetermined and without taking into consideration basic facts, submissions and judicial pronouncements on the subject and, therefore, bad in law and on facts. 11. The CIT(A) misdirected himself in considering totally irrelevant material like non-withdrawal of ap....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssessee has submitted, inter alia, that subsequent to the passing of the assessment order, under a mutual agreement procedure, it has been agreed by both the Governments, i.e., of the United States of America and India, that section 44D of the I.T. Act will not be applicable to the facts and circumstances of the assessee's case; that consequence to the said mutual decision, the Assessing Officer had passed an order under section 154, holding that the provisions of section 44D will not be applicable in the case of the assessee; that therefore, the total income of the assessee was redetermined; that the assessee had, in its appeal, challenged the then existing conclusions of the Income-tax Authorities that section 44D was applicable to the as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....TCCC the authorization to manufacture and sell in India concentrates, beverages, bases and syrups for the products. Britco further acts in India to promote and enhance the business of the said company in the production and sale of products. The assessee-company has expertise and know-how in the field of manufacture, sale and marketing of beverages, syrups, food stuffs in general and the products in particular and in providing services in connection therewith. During the year, the assessee received service fees amounting to Rs. 63,68,36,936 from Britco under the terms of agreement dated 1-4-1995 between the assessee-company and Britco. This receipt was treated by the assessee as its business income and its profit was computed after claiming ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he assessee, holding, inter alia, that he did not subscribe to the view of the assessee that the words restricting the allowance in accordance with the provisions and subject to the limitations of the Act only referred to allocation of executive and general administrative expenses; that as per article 7(3) of the DTAA between India and USA, the deduction of the expenses incurred for the purposes of business is to be allowed; that such expenses would include a reasonable allocation of general overheads, etc.; that so, allocable expenses are includible in the expenses referred to in the first limb of article 7(3), which are allowed; that the Article does not make any distinction between the two; that the deduction is subjected to the provisio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....me of the assessee in this regard. The assessee has not claimed any expenses thereagainst. 7. On the other hand, the ld. DR has placed strong reliance on the orders of the Taxing Authorities. 8. We have gone through the aforesaid Tribunal order in the assessee's own case for assessment year 1996-97, passed on 16-3-2005 in ITA Nos. 1362 & 1363 (Delhi) of 2001. The same issue, as is before us, was also considered by the Tribunal in the aforesaid order for the immediately two preceding assessment years. The Tribunal held that the question as to whether the reimbursement of actual cost incurred by the assessee could be considered as the income of the assessee, was squarely covered by the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the cas....