Is 'equipment lost in hole' included in the gross revenue for computation of profits u/s 44BB of the IT Act?

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
 DELHI BENCH ‘D’, NEW DELHI

BEFORE SH. N. K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AND
SH. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
 (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING)

ITA No.79/Del/2017
 Assessment Year: 2012-13

DCIT
(International Taxation)
Circle-II
Dehradun
PAN No. AADCS1107J
(APPELLANT) 

Vs

Schlumberger Asia
Services Ltd.
C/o. M/s. Nangia & Co.
3rd Floor, NCR Plaza,
Municipal No.24A,
New Cantt Road, Dehradun
(RESPONDENT) 

Appellant by Sh. Salil Kapoor, Advocate
Ms. Soumya Singh, Advocate
Respondent by Dr. Prabha Kant, CIT

Date of hearing: 01/07/2021
Date of Pronouncement: 01/07/2021 

ORDER

PER N. K. BILLAIYA, AM:

 This appeal by the revenue is preferred against the order of the CIT(A)-2, Noida dated 31.10.2016 pertaining to A.Y. 2012-13. 

2. The grievance of the revenue read as under :-

(i) Whether the CIT (A) has eared, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, in holding that the amount received by the assessee on account of ‘equipment lost in hole’ is not includible in the gross revenue for the purpose of computation of profits under the presumptive provisions of section 44BB of the Act, when the said provisions are a complete code of taxation in themselves and do not distinguish between revenue and capital receipts having made allowance for expenditure including depreciation on capital assets to the extent of 90% of gross revenue.

(ii) Whether the CIT (A) has erred in not appreciating the fact that the amount received by the assessee on account of ‘equipment lost in hole’ is infact the reimbursement of expenses and hence includible in the gross revenue for the purpose of computation of profits as per the provisions of section 44BB of the Act in accordance with the spirit of the ratio of the judgment of Hon’ble Uttarakhand High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Halliburton offshore Services Inc. (300 ITR 265).

(iii) Whether the CIT (A) has erred in placing reliance on the order of Hon’ble Uttarakhand High Court in the case of assessee for the AY 1996-97, when the SLP filed by the Revenue against the said judgment is still pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

(iv) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case in law, the CIT (A) has erred in holding that receipts on account of services tax are not includible in gross revenue of the assessee for the purpose of computation of profits under the provisions of section 44BB of the IT Act, 1961. 

To know more in details find the attachment file