2011 (7) TMI 99

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... M/s LS Cables Limited, Korea on 22.6.2007 with a view to bid for four tenders invited by the Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Ltd., (KPTCL) for setting up four specified transmission lines on turnkey basis. According to the consortium agreement, the applicant was to act as the leading company on winning the contract and the parties were jointly and severally bound for the successful performance of the contract and to be fully responsible for the design, manufacture, supply and successful performance of the equipments in accordance with the contract. According to the consortium agreement, all local supplies, installation services, testing and commissioning of 220 KV XLPE cable circuits fell within the scope of the work to be done by....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... is in the negative, whether any tax is required to be deducted at source by the Applicant on payments to LSCL i.e. recipient non-resident Korean company.   3. It is the case of the applicant that transfer of the goods by LS Cables, Korea to the applicant being outside India, there is no territorial nexus for taxation regarding those off-shore supplies. It is pointed out that the applicant after obtaining the goods from LS Cables, Korea sells them to KPTCL for consideration. For its on-shore activity, including the sale it is taxed in India. Learned Counsel specifically requested as to note that sale by the applicant to KPTCL is taxed in India since it is taxable in India and that part of the contract is not involved in this applica....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ntract and the contract has to be construed in the context of the relevant provision of the Income-tax Act. The doubts expressed by this Authority on some of the aspects of that ruling is relied on in support. The representative also made an attempt to raise questions regarding the correctness of the view taken in Ishikawajima Harima Heavy Industries.   5. It is not for us to consider the arguments on the correctness or otherwise of the view expressed or test the correctness of the postulates in the decision of the Supreme Court. It is for the Revenue to raise those questions before the Supreme Court if it wants to seek a reconsideration of the question. Suffice it to say, that we are bound by the law laid by the Supreme Court in th....