Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Royal Bank of Scotland N.V. Vs CIT (Calcutta High Court)
Appeal Number : ITA/155/2005
Date of Judgement/Order : 22/05/2024
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Royal Bank of Scotland N.V. Vs CIT (Calcutta High Court)

So far as the letter dated 21.11.1994 issued by Joint Secretary and addressed to Chief Commissioner of Income Tax II Kolkata is concerned, ITAT find that it was written in response to a D.O. letter of the Chief Commissioner. The letter of the Joint Secretary merely informs that “the matter has been looked into and the board is of the opinion that the tax rate applicable in the case of ABN AMRO BANK would be the same as for an Indian Company at the relevant tax rate applicable for the concerned assessment years”. The said letter is a D.O. letter. It is not a circular issued in exercise of power conferred under Section 119 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. That apart the said letter is in conflict with plain and unambiguous provisions of the Act 1961 and the Finance Act which we have discussed above. That apart the opinion expressed in the aforesaid letter was also changed even before the Explanation was inserted. ITAT also agrees with the reasons recorded by the ITAT in paragraph 59 of the impugned order. Accordingly ITAT hold that the said letter cannot override the plain and unambiguous provision of the Act, 1961 and the Finance Act.

FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF CALCUTTA HIGH COURT

1. Heard Sri Percy Pardiwala, learned senior advocate assisted by Sri Akhilesh Gupta, learned counsel for the appellant and Smt. Smita Das De and Sri Smarajit Roychowdhury, learned senior standing counsel for the respondent.

2. Learned counsels for the parties jointly stated that similar facts and question are involved in all the above noted six appeals and accordingly requested to hear all the appeals together. Therefore, all the afore-noted six appeals have been heard at length on 16.04.2024 and 18.04.2024 and the judgement has been reserved on 18.04.2024. Although by order dated 17.05.2005 the appeal was admitted on three substantial questions of law, but the learned counsel for the appellant has pressed and argued only on substantial question of law no. (a) which is reproduced below;-

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

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

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031