✦ Uttarakhand High Court

M/s Reading & Bates Drilling Co v. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Dehradun

Income Tax Appeal No. 119 of 2004C S RAWAT

Case at a glance

Outcome

Dismissed

this Court, this appeal is dismissed

Provisions considered

Key paragraphs

  • Para 33. In Commissioner of Income Tax- and another Vs. Sedco Forex International Drilling Co. Ltd. and connected cases reported in (2003) 264 ITR 320, a Division Bench of this Court held that the payment of Salary for “off period” was income earned in India, i.e.…
  • Para 44. Following the above mentioned judgment of a Division Bench of this Court, this appeal is dismissed. (J.C.S. Rawat, J.) 28.09.2005 (Cyriac Joseph, C.J.) 28.09.2005 A

Judgment

M/s Reading & Bates Drilling Co. as agent of Mr. Fritz Verlinden C/o Nangia & Company, B-57, Soami Nagar, New Delhi- 110 017 Versus The Commissioner of Income Tax, Dehradun. Miss. Krishi Shukla/Dr. Udyog Shukla, Advocates for the appellant. Mr. S.K. Posti, Advocate for the respondent. Coram: Hon. Cyriac Joseph, C.J. Hon. J.C.S. Rawat, J. JUDGMENT CYRIAC JOSEPH, C.J. (Oral) …Appellant ….Respondent

1.

This appeal is filed against the order dated 26.03.2004 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench ‘F’, New Delhi in I.T.A. No. 1525/Del/2000. The appellant is the assessee. The dispute relates to the Assessment Year 1997-1998.

2.

The substantial question of law raised in the appeal is as follows: Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal erred in law in holding that the “off period” salary paid to the appellant was liable to tax in India.

3.

In Commissioner of Income Tax- and another Vs. Sedco Forex International Drilling Co. Ltd. and connected cases reported in (2003) 264 ITR 320, a Division Bench of this Court held that the payment of Salary for “off period” was income earned in India, i.e., for services rendered in India under Section 9(1)(ii) and that “off period salary” was taxable under section 9(1)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Operative part

4.

Following the above mentioned judgment of a Division Bench of this Court, this appeal is dismissed. (J.C.S. Rawat, J.) 28.09.2005 (Cyriac Joseph, C.J.) 28.09.2005 A

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: this Court, this appeal is dismissed

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Income Tax Act, 1961 — s. 9(1)(ii).

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No treatment data yet for this judgment in the Courts & Cases corpus.

Absence of data is not a statement about the judgment’s standing — the corpus covers only judgments we index and link with cited evidence.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Uttarakhand High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Income Tax Appeal No. 119 of 2004). ← Search more judgments