2010 (12) TMI 734

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 2007-08 was filed by it on 31st Oct., 2007 declaring total income of Rs. 5,73,42,828. As reflected in the P and L a/c filed along with the said return, the assessee had purchased software products amounting to Rs. 200 crores, out of which import purchases were to the extent of Rs. 135 crores and balance purchases of Rs. 65 crores were from local parties. Tax at source was duly deducted by the assessee from the purchases made from non-residents, and no tax was deducted from the local purchases of software products on the ground that the said purchases were made for trading purposes and not for internal use and there was no acquisition of any copyright in the software products or the license purchased. In the assessment completed under s. 1....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....T(A) to justify the addition of Rs. 65 crores made to the total income of the assessee under s. 40(a)(ia) has been overruled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court by its judgment delivered in the case of GE India Technology Centre (P) Ltd. vs. CIT and Anr. (2010) 234 CTR (SC) 153 : (2010) 44 DTR (SC) 201 : (2010) 327 1TR 456 (SC). As further submitted by the learned counsel for the assessee, keeping in view the said decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the issue relating to the addition of Rs. 65 crores made by the AO and confirmed by the learned CIT(A) under s. 40(a)(ia) has to go back to the AO to decide the same on merit as neither the AO nor the CIT(A) has decided the same on merit. Although the learned Departmental Representative has invited ....