Case Law Details
Ericsson India Private Limited Vs ACIT (Delhi High Court)
It is not as if the petitioner/assessee is not offering unearned revenue for tax; it is only on account of accounting policy followed consistently that unearned revenue is offered for tax in the year in which services are rendered and/or goods are sold. Thus, the transaction, in effect, being revenue neutral, it does not affect the interest of revenue.
The upshot of the aforesaid discussion is that the estimation made by the AO that because there is a likelihood of the petitioner–assessee having to bear a tax liability of Rs. 500 crores in AY 2018-19, and, therefore, the refund sought of Rs. 349,41,45,020/- ought to be denied, is not founded on rational and cogent grounds.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF DELHI HIGH COURT
1. This is a writ petition directed against the order dated 28.04.2020, passed by the respondents-revenue under Section 241A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short ‗the Act‘], concerning the assessment year (AY) 2018-2019.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
