SASKEN TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-6(1)(1), BANGALORE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal allowed the appeal concerning disallowance of payments to Forrester Research Ltd. as the assessee satisfied the conditions for deduction under Section 80G. For payments made through the US branch, the Tribunal remanded the issue to the Assessing Officer to examine the scope of work for Tangent International, UK, allowing the assessee an opportunity to furnish details.
What were the facts?
The assessee, engaged in telecom software services, made payments to its US branch and to Forrester Research Ltd. without deducting tax at source. The Assessing Officer disallowed these payments under Section 40(a)(i) read with Section 195, treating them as fees for technical services sourced in India. The assessee argued that the services were utilized for business outside India and did not make available technical knowledge.
What were the issues?
Whether payments made to foreign entities for services utilized by an Indian company's overseas branch are chargeable to tax in India and require TDS. Whether disallowance under Section 14A and eligibility for deduction under Section 80G were correctly determined.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 40(a)(i),Section 195,Section 14A,Section 80G,Section 9(1)(vii)(b),Section 234B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH: BANGALORE
Before: SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, VICE – & SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K.
PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, VICE – PRESIDENT
These two appeals have been filed by the assessee for different assessment years. Since they involve common issues and both parties advanced common arguments, they are disposed of together by this common order.
ITA No. 2057/Bang/2025 is filed by M/s. Sasken Technologies Ltd. [ THE Assessee/ Appellant] for Assessment Year 2017-18 against the appellate order dated 31 July 2025 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [ the ld. CIT (A)]. By the said order, the appeal filed by the assessee against the assessment order dated 3 December 2019 passed under section 143(3) of
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 40(a)(i)
- M/S American Express Bank Ltd., Mumbai vs The Jt DIT (It)1(1), MumbaiITA 9414/MUM/2004[2000-2001]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2000-2001
- DDIT(It)- 1(1), Mumbai vs M/S. American Express Bank Ltd., MumbaiITA 5667/MUM/2004[2000-01]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2000-01
- Eurofins Peenya Resources Private Limited… vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 1116/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2016-17
- Azure Green Tech Private Limited, Delhi vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle…ITA 6199/DEL/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed21 Sept 2026AY 2021-22
- Azure Green Tech Private Limited, Delhi vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle…ITA 6198/DEL/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed21 Sept 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Utkal Highways, Bidanasi vs. Union Of INDIAOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Pradeep Kumar Behera vs. Superintendent CGST And Central Excise., CuttackOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Manas Behera vs. Commissioner, CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Pramod Kumar Nayak vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, KendraparaOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Nirmal Kumar Sharma S/O Ram Swroop Sharma vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 16 Oct 2026