2008 (1) TMI 179

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Tribunal, Bangalore Bench "A", in the assessee's I. T. A. No. 402 (Bang)/2002 for the assessment year 1999-2000. In the memo of appeal even though several substantial questions of law have been formulated, but after having heard learned counsel for the parties, learned counsel for the appellant agreed that in fact questions Nos. 33 and 34 may be formulated for decision by this court in this appeal. Questions Nos. 33 and 34 are reproduced hereunder: "1. Whether, under the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is justified in upholding the levy of interest under section 201(1A) for the period between October 1, 1998, to January 31, 2000, when the appellant had paid excess amounts to the tune of Rs. 1....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....September 30, as the case may be. The said royalty payable by the assessee to the collaborator was subject to the provisions of tax deduction at source, as per the various provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessee credited the royalty as per the agreed terms to the collaborator from April 1, 1994, to January 31, 2000. The assessee initially deducted income-tax at the rate of 30 per cent. of royalty payable to the collaborator and this tax deducted was remitted to the Central Government as and when the royalty was credited. Subsequently the assessee noticed during the year 1998 that the tax deductible under section 195 of the Act was 15 per cent. of the royalty payable and not 30 per cent. which was deducted by the assessee err....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... said order, the assessee preferred appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), but the appeal also met the fate of dismissal, which gave rise to the assessee to prefer further appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal also came to the conclusion that no case was made out for any interference and dismissed the appeal. Hence, this further appeal under section 260A of the Act." After having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the cords, we are of the considered opinion that the circular of the Board bearing No. 333, dated April 2, 1982 (see [1982 137 ITR (St.) 1), dealing with the conflict between the provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and the provisions of the double taxation avoidance agreement, its clarification....