JUDGMENT

Rajiv Shakdher, J.

1. The captioned appeals have been preferred by the Revenue against a common judgment dated 04.10.2006 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal') passed in ITA Nos. 50/Del/2006 to 55/Del/2006 pertaining to assessment years 1995-96 to 2000-01 and ITA Nos. 168/Del/2006 to 171/Del/2006 in respect of assessment years 1995-96, 1996-97, 1999-2000 and 2000-01. The Tribunal by the impugned judgment has disposed of ten appeals, out of which six appeals were filed by the assessee i.e., Sheraton International Inc. while the remaining four appeals were filed by the Revenue. As is evident from the impugned judgment of the Tribunal, both the assessee, as well as, the Revenue had filed four cross appeals each for assessment years 1995-96, 1996-97, 1999-2000 and 2000-01. The remaining two, were the appeals of the assessee, for assessment years 1997-98 and 1998-99.

2. The Revenue being aggrieved by the impugned judgment has preferred the present appeals under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). Even though the Revenue, in these appeals, has proposed a total of ten questions, at the time of hearing the learned counsel for the Revenue, Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal confined his submissions to the following proposed questions of law:

(A) Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the amount received by the assessee from the Indian hotels/clients for the services rendered under the terms of the agreements was in the nature of 'business profits' not liable to tax in terms of the Article 7 of the Indo-American DTAA?

(B) Whether the income of the assessee from the receipts for services rendered to Indian clients/hotels was taxable in India with reference to the charging provisions of sections 4, 5 and 9 of the Act?

(C) Whether income received by the assessee was taxable in India as 'royalty' and/or 'fee for included services' as per article 12(3)(a) and/o article 1294)(a) and/or article 12(4)(b) of the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between India and USA?

(D) Whether the amount received by the assessee under the terms of the agreements with the Indian clients/hotels was in the nature of 'royalty' as contemplated in Explanation-2 to section 9(1)(vi) and (vii) of the Act?

(E) Whether the Ld Tribunal has correctly interpreted the relevant clauses and Articles of the agreements to arrive at a conclusion that the intention/purpose of the arrangement was to promote hotel business worldwide and the other services enumerated in the Articles were merely ancillary or auxiliary to the main object.

(F) Whether the relevant agreement executed by the assessee was a colourable device only for the purpose of voiding chargeability of tax in India?

(I) Whether the amount of contribution received by the assessee from the Indian hotels/clients in respect of "Sheraton Club International"/ "Starwood Preferred Guest" Programme and "Frequent Flyer Programme" would fall within the ambit of article 12 of the DTAA as "free for included services"?

The following three questions i.e. (G), (H) & (J) were not pressed before us:

(G) Whether the Ld. ITAT was correct in law in holding that no interest under Section 234B is liable to be levied when the payments received by the assessee are subjected to deduction of tax at source irrespective of the actual deduction?

(H) Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the provisions of Section 209(1)(a) and 209(1)(d) apply even in the case of an assessee who denies its liability to be assessed under the Act and who has not filed a voluntary return, and consequently no interest under Section 234B can be charged in such a case if income is subsequently assessed in its hands?

(J) Whether while deleting the addition to the extent of 25% made by the AO in the set aside proceedings for the assessment years 1996-97 and 1997-98, the Tribunal has correctly interpreted the relevant statutory provisions with regard to scope