Bombay H.C : Cancelling the order passed under section 195 read with section 201 of the Income-tax Act, 1961

High Court Of Bombay

DIT (International Taxation) vs. Dun & Bradstreet Information Services India (P.) Ltd

Assessment Year : 2002-03

Section : 195

J.P. Devadhar And A.A. Sayed, JJ.

IT Appeal No. 780 Of 2010

July 11, 2011

JUDGMENT

1. Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in cancelling the order passed under section 195 read with section 201 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is the question raised in this appeal.

2. The assessee had imported business information reports from Dun and Bradstreet, USA, and made remittances in respect thereof without deducting tax at source. The Assessing Officer held that the assessee was liable to deduct tax at source and accordingly passed an order under section 195 read with section 201 of the Act. The appeal filed by the assessee was dismissed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). On further appeal, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal set aside the order passed under section 195 read with section 201 of the Act by following its decision in the assessee’s own case for the assessment year 2002-03 in I.T.A. No. 1773/Mum/ 2006 and the decision of the Authority for Advance Rulings on identical facts in the case of Dun and S.A. Bradstreet Espana In re Authority for Advance Rulings No. 615 of 2003 [2005] 272 ITR 99 (AAR)), D and B Europe Authority for Advance Rulings No. 657 of 2005, dated October 27, 2005, and D and B UK Authority for Advance Rulings No. 656 of 2005, dated October 27, 2005. In all these cases the Authority for Advance Rulings held that the sale of very same business information reports by the subsidiaries of Dun and Bradstreet US in Spain, Europe and U. K. to the assessee did not attract the provisions of section 195 of the Act. Though the decision of the Authority for Advance Rulings is not binding in the present case, since the decision of the Authority for Advance Rulings relates to the very same business information reports imported by the petitioner and no fault in the decision of the Authority for Advance Rulings is pointed out, we see no reason to interfere with the decision of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs.

[Citation : 338 ITR 95]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *