TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (11) TMI 1297
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(A) has erred in law in deleting the interest chargeable u/s. 234B by holding that interest is not leviable in respect of payments to the non-resident appellant, being subject to tax deduction at source u/s. 195 of the I.T. Act, 1961. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law by ignoring the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Karanvir Singh Ghosa vs. CIT in Civil Appeal No. 1937 of 2007, September 6, 2012 and CIT vs. Anjum MH Ghaswala & others (2001) 252 ITR 1, wherein the Supreme Court has held that interest u/s. 234B is mandatory in nature. 3. The appellant craves to add, amend, modify or alter any grounds of appeal at the time or before the hearing of the appeal. 3. The br....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....es not have any Permanent Establishment (PE) in India. This issue has, however, been settled after it was taken up in the MAP proceedings. The Indian Competent Authority in consultation with the US Competent Authority passed the MAP orders for AY 1996-97 to AY 2001-02, which stated that the assessee has a PE in India as per Article 5 of the DTAA and the income attributable to such PE is taxable in India on a net income basis. In the instant year the Assessee has again filed its return of income on GNOM basis, which is in consultation to the system being followed from assessment year 2005-06. In this return the assessee declared total revenues of Rs. 46,68,64,577/- and global operating margin of 16.55%. It has been observed that the global o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....14 passed u/s. 144C(3) read with section 148/143(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961. Against the aforesaid AO's order dated 28.5.2014, assessee appealed before the Ld. CIT(A)-43, New Delhi who vide his impugned order dated 13.5.2015 has held that interest u/s. 234B is not leviable as all payments at source u/s. 195 and allowed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 4. Ld. DR relied upon the Order of the AO and reiterated the contentions raised in the grounds of appeal. 5. Ld. Counsel of the assessee relied upon the order of the Ld. CIT(A). 6. We have heard both the parties and perused the relevant records, especially the impugned order. We find that the solitary issue r....