Case Law Details
Delhi High Court held In the case of Turner Broadcasting Systems Asia Pacific INC. vs. DDIT that the assessing officer has merely intended to revisit the concluded assessments and it is a clear case of change of opinion, which is not permissible in law. It is clear that no fresh information or material has been referred to in the reasons recorded for reopen the assessment. The material that is referred to is the very same material that was already before the Assessing Officer at the time of framing of the assessment under Section 143 (3).
Facts of the Case
Turner Broadcasting Systems Asia Pacific Inc. (TENA), is a company incorporated in the state of Georgia, U.S.A. and is a tax resident of the U.S.A. During the relevant financial years, TENA derived income from the grant of exclusive rights to Turner International India Private Limited (TIIPL) in India to sell advertising on the products and to distribute the products. The assessee filed its return of income for the AY 2007-08 on 27.03.2009 declaring an income of Rs. 12,40,99,555 . On 11.08.2009,a questionnaire was issued by the revenue seeking details/evidence/explanations on various aspects pertaining to taxability of the petitioner. In total 38 queries were raised. On 5.10.2009, the assessee filed a detailed reply to the said questionnaire.
On 24.12.2009, the proceedings u/s 143 (3) of the Income Tax Act were concluded and the assessment was framed. The Assessing Officer came to the conclusion that only 10% of the total advertisement and distribution revenue earned in India was taxable in India. The Assessing Officer in the assessment order has specifically recorded that since the facts of the year under consideration remain the same, therefore, following the agreement reached by the respective competent authorities in the earlier years, the tax was computed at 10% as per the mutual agreement to avoid double taxation under India /USA DTAA (MAP resolutions). As per the terms of the mutual agreement, 10% of the advertisement revenues received from Indian Sources during the relevant previous years by the appellant is deemed to net profit chargeable to tax in India. On 27.03.2012 notice under Section 147/148 was issued, within the period of four years and the said notice was served on 30.03.2012.On 14.05.2012, the petitioner filed objections to the reasons. By order dated 22.02.2013, the objections have been disposed of.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
