TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (11) TMI 1862
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dispute in the appeal of the assessee is with regard to the taxability of fees received from Wockhardt Hospitals Ltd pursuant to Master Service Agreement, whether falls under fees for technical services or royalty. 3. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that identical issue came up before the Tribunal for earlier Assessment Years and the Tribunal for the Assessment Years 2002-03 to 2012-13 held that such payments can neither be said to be royalty nor FTS. Copies of the orders are placed on record. It is also submitted by the Ld. Counsel that there is no change in facts and this fact is also recorded by the Assessing Officer in the Assessment Order. 4. Ld. DR vehemently supported the orders of the authorities below. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2, Mumbai the Assessing Officer(AO)has filed the present appeal. Assessee- is a non-profit educational entity set up in the United States of America(USA).It filed its return of income on 27/11/2012, declaring total income at Rs. Nil. The case was selected for scrutiny and notice was issued on 06/08/2013 u/s.143(2) of the Act. Subsequently notice u/s. 142(1) was issued on 19/02/2014 and 24/12/2014. The assessment was completed on 28/01/2016, determining its income at Rs. 3.94 crores, u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) of the Act. 2. During the assessment proceedings, the AO found that during the year under consideration, the assessee had received fees of USD 886,000 for providing various consulting services under agreements with various Indian e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....appeal for the AY.2002-03,(ITA No.1558/Mum/07 dated 18/11/2011,the Tribunal has observed as under: "17. We have considered the rival submissions. We are of the view that the consideration received by the assessee can neither be said to be royalty not FIS. The payment in question was purely for the purpose of advising, recommending and assisting in relation to healthcare projects. It was also for conducting education and training programmes. It was also for the purpose of review and giving feed back of various aspects and new cardiac hospital to be set up, recommendation on planned patient care delivery system. In page 15A to 15D of the CIT(A)'s order a summary of the activities undertaken by the assessee for WHL. have been given. A p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ibunal has held as follows: "28. ITA No. 1559/M/07 is an appeal by the revenue against the order dated 26/10/2006 of CIT(A) 33, Mumbai relating to A. Y2003-04 and C.O No, 146/Ml07 is a cross objection by the assessee against the very same order of the CIT(A). The ground raised by the revenue in its appeal and Ground No. 1 to 3 raised by the assessee in its Cross Objection are identical to the Grounds 1 & 2 raised by the revenue in its appeal ITA 1558/M/07 and Ground No. 1 to 3 in the Cross Objection No. 145/M/07 raised by the assessee in this Cross Objection forA.Y2002-03. For the reasons given while deciding identical grounds in A. Y 2002-03, we dismiss the grounds raised by the revenue and allow Ground N0.1 to 3 raised by the assessee ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s FIS nor as royalty and also the Assessee does not have any P.E in India and, therefore, the payment received by it cannot be taxed in India. Accordingly,consistent with the view taken in earlier years in assessee's own case, we allow grounds no. 1 and 2, raised by the assessee." The above said decision of the Tribunal shall be applicable to the fees received by the assessee in the current year under Consulting Agreement (Wokhard Hospitals and Carol Info Services Ltd) and under Award Agreement of Vokhard Hospitals)," 3.3. We further find that the department is in appeal before the Hon'ble Bombay High Court for AY.s 2000-01 to AY 2004-05 ,that the Department had not filed appeal yet for AY 2006- 07 to AY 2009-10 where decision wa....