Services  |  Subscribe  |  Contact Us  |   Feedback   |  E-mail  |  News |  Home
JUDGMENTS
CENTRAL EXCISE
CUSTOMS
SERVICE TAX
INCOME TAX
VAT
FINANCE ACTS
FINANCE BILLS
EOU STPI
SEZ
DGFT
RBI
NTT
RESOURCES
GST


    
Email | Print

Important Links         SC        HC        CESTAT        ITAT        AAR

ADVANCE RULINGS 2009

AIT-2009-400-AAR
M/s Guthy Renker Marketing Private Limited Vs. CCE, Mumbai

Whether the activities of labelling(including declaration of MRP) of individual containers namely Proactiv Solution Revitalizing Toner, Proactiv Solution Renewing Cleanser, Proactiv Solution Repairing Lotion and Proactiv Solution Refining Mask at applicant’s factory amounts to manufacture under the excise law?
In view of the clarification provided by the applicant during the course of hearing and confirmed by the applicant’s counsel in his letter dated 4th August, 2009, since the labelling operation on the individual containers meant for retail sale separately (Category –I products) would be carried out at the port of import itself and no labelling is proposed to be carried out at the factory premises, this question is not anymore relevant.

AIT-2009-406-AAR
Mrs. Delna Rustum Boyce Vs. DIT, Ahmedabad

the profit of the proposed undertaking of the assessee derived from its business of squeezing of juice from fruits and vegetables; extracting oil, emulsifying, homogenizing and / or spray drying it; adding preservatives and other additives to it and packaging it in compatible packs, is profit from the business of processing, preservation and packing of fruits or vegetables eligible for deduction under sub-section (11A) of section 80IB of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

AIT-2009-407-AAR
M/s International Tire Engineering Resources LLC Vs. DIT, Mumbai

the consideration received towards technology transfer/technical know-how and the services connected therewith is clearly liable to be taxed as royalty under Sec. 9(1)(vi) of the IT Act, 1961. The power of taxation in this regard cannot be denied to the Indian Government from the standpoint of territorial nexus and by reference to the observations made in Ishikawajima case on the aspect of territorial nexus
the sum of USD 343,425 representing consideration for the transfer of know-how and the grant of right to use the know-how can be subjected to tax in India under the Income-tax Act, 1961, treating the same as deemed income by way of royalty

AIT-2009-434-AAR
M/s. Sumitomo Mitsui Construction Co. Ltd Vs. DIT (International Taxation), Delhi

the income by way of royalty accruing to the applicant is liable to be taxed in terms of Article 12 of the DTAA between India and Japan at a rate not exceeding 10% from the assessment year 2008-09 onwards.

AIT-2009-435-AAR
Jodhpur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited Vs. CIT, Jodhpur

(1) Whether claim of depreciation u/s 32 amounting to Rs. 71985930/- is allowable to the assessee company, keeping in view the amount involved under the head cost variance reserves capital contribution towards services connection and capital subsidy and grants towards cost of capital assets.
(2) Whether the amount of interest paid to RRVPN Rs. 1168841/- on the amount of FDR loan raised by RRVPN from financial institutions on behalf of assessee company is allowable to the assessee company.
(3) Whether audited accounts can be disturbed by the A.O. for the purpose of calculation of MAT u/s 115JB.
(4) Whether the amount debited under the head “prior period expenses” can be added back for the purpose of book profit u/s 115JB.
(5) Whether amount of depreciation which is no where debited in the books of accounts but derived during assessment proceeding by the A.O. can be added back for the purpose of books profit u/s 115JB.

AIT-2009-440-AAR
M/s Lapp India Pvt. Ltd Vs. CCE, Bangalore

the activity of cutting specified varieties of cables received by the applicant into prescribed lengths, testing thereof and packaging does not amount to manufacture in terms of clause (f) of section 2 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with note 6 of Section XVI of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985

AIT-2009-448-AAR
Dana Corporation Vs. DIT (International Taxation), Mumbai

whether the transfer of shares of Dana India Technical Centre Private Limited, Dana India Private Limited and Spicer India Limited, by Dana Corporation, is not taxable under the Income-tax Act, 1961?
2. If the answer to the question 1 is in the affirmative, whether advance tax paid as an abundant caution, be refunded as per provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961?
the transfer of shares of the three Indian companies by Dana Corporation to US Dana WC and Dana Global is not chargeable to tax as capital gains under the Income-tax Act, 1961. The first question is accordingly answered in the affirmative. The second question is answered by observing that the applicant can seek appropriate remedies under the Act for the refund of advance tax paid.

AIT-2009-449-AAR
Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI) Vs. DIT, New Delhi

Advance Ruling-Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the IC2 Institute of University of Taxes, Austin, USA executing the agreement between FICCI and UT(IC2) is covered by the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) between India and USA?
ii. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case UT(IC2) is not liable to pay income-tax in India out of the payments received by it from FICCI in installments?
iii. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, FICCI is not required to deduct tax under the provisions of Section 195 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 in respect of the payments made by it to UT(IC2) for execution of the agreement?

AIT-2009-457-AAR
Geofizyka Torun Sp.zo.o. Vs. DIT (International Taxation), New Delhi

the contention of the applicant that the activities/services related to seismic data acquisition clearly fall within the ambit of Section 44BB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and, therefore, the computation of income should be done in terms of that Section.
Whether income derived by the applicant in India is covered under the provisions of Section 44BB of the Income Tax Act, 1961?
The income has to be computed in terms of Section 44BB.

AIT-2009-481-AAR
M/s Wavefield Inseis ASA Vs. DIT (International Taxation), New Delhi

The applicant is a company incorporated under the laws of Norway and is a tax resident of Norway. The applicant is a marine geophysical company that conducts seismic surveys and provides offshore seismic data acquisition and other associated services to global oil companies. Such services are aimed at increasing the exploration success of its oil and gas clients and to assist them in maximizing production from their existing reservoirs. The applicant was awarded a 3 year contract by ONGC for 3D Seismic data acquisition and onboard processing offshore India during the field season 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2010-11, in different survey areas of Western and Eastern Indian Offshore.

AIT-2009-482-AAR
Seabird Exploration FZ LLC Vs. DIT (International Taxation), Delhi

The applicant has entered into 3 contracts with the Oil & Natural Gas Ltd. (ONGC) on 20th Feb.,2008 for 2D seismic, gravity and magnetic data acquisition and on-board seismic data processing offshore India, during the field seasons 2007-08 and 2008-09 in different survey areas of Western and Eastern Indian Offshore
the income earned by the applicant in India is covered under the provisions of 44BB of the Income-tax Act, 1961


HOME ¦ Judgment ¦ Central Excise ¦ Customs  ¦ Service Tax ¦ Income Tax ¦ VAT ¦ Finance Act ¦ Finance Bills ¦ EOU STPI ¦ SEZ ¦ DGFT ¦ RBI ¦ NTT ¦ Resources

 

  Copyright © 2006 allindiantaxes.com | All rights reserved
website designing India & CMS development: Softlogics & Developments