TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (12) TMI 952
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r for the sake of convenience. Assessment Year : 1998-99:- 2. First two grounds of the Revenue's appeal are against the deletion of addition made by the Assessing Officer amounting to Rs. 49,26,42,023 by computing profit at 5% of the turnover of Rs. 9,85,28,40,467 arising from the supply of equipment to GPEC. 3. Briefly stated the facts of these two grounds are that the assessee-company entered into two contracts with Gujarat PowerGen Energy Corporation Limited (GPEC). First relating to supply of material/equipment for consideration of DM 713 millions and the second relating to design and engineering of erection material/equipment for consideration of DM 32 millions. Both the contracts were entered into on 12.5.1994. During the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... or arise to the assessee in India within the meaning of section 9 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Further it has been held that the payment was received by the assessee outside India. We have gone through the copy of agreement with GPEC, which is available on record. Albeit in this year the party with whom the contracts were entered, namely GPEC, is different, as against M/s BPL system and Project Limited, with whom the contract was entered into the preceding year yet the major terms of the contract, in so far as they are relevant for our decision on this issue, are mutatis mutandis similar. The learned Departmental Representative failed to invite our attention towards any clause of the instant contract by which departure is required from the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....earlier Circulars with effect from 22.10.2009 has no bearing in assessment year 1998-99. 6. We are reminded of the Full Bench judgement of the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in CIT vs. B.M. Edwards, India Seafood [(1979) 119 ITR 334 (Ker.) (FB)]. In that case there was some circular in operation from 1944 allowing the loss suffered by a spouse to be set off against the income of the other spouse. The circular was withdrawn on April 6, 1972, that is, after the expiry of the assessment year 1971-72 in dispute. Though the assessment was completed after the withdrawal of the Circular, the Tribunal took the view that since the Circular was in operation at the time of the commencement of the assessment year the same was binding upon the authori....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he said order dated 30.6.2009. Following the precedent we uphold the impugned order on this issue. 9. First two grounds of the cross objection of the assessee read as under:- "(1) In the event the Departments Ground Nos.1 and 2 are allowed, then the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-XXXI, Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as the CIT(A)) be directed to deal with the alternative contentions raised before him as to the manner and the quantum of income that was assessable in India. (2) The CIT(A) erred in holding that the ground no.9 was not pressed during the course of the proceedings. He failed to appreciate that what was submitted was that in case his findings were in favour of the respondents in respect of ground....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pectfully following the precedents we allow this ground of appeal. 13. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the cross objection of the assessee is partly allowed. Assessment Year : 1999-2000:- 14. First two grounds of the Departmental appeal are similar to those of assessment year 1998-99 by which the learned CIT(A) directed to delete the addition of Rs. 3,06,41,744 which was made by the Assessing Officer applying profit rate of 2.09% on the turnover of Rs. 1,46,61,12,171. In view of our discussion given in the foregoing paras in relation to the assessment year 1998-99, we uphold the impugned order on this issue as no distinguishing feature has been brought to our notice by the learned Department representative....