RANE ENGINE VALVES LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the services rendered were marketing support and did not 'make available' technical knowledge to the assessee. Therefore, the payment did not constitute 'fee for technical services' under the DTAA and the disallowance was not justified.
What were the facts?
The assessee paid professional fees to a non-resident entity for marketing support services. The Assessing Officer disallowed the expense for non-deduction of TDS, invoking Section 40(a)(i). The assessee contended that the services were not 'fee for technical services' and were covered under the India-Germany DTAA.
What were the issues?
Whether professional fees paid to a non-resident for marketing support services are disallowable under Section 40(a)(i) for non-deduction of TDS, and if such payments constitute 'fee for technical services' under the relevant DTAA.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(8)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd.2,118 citing313 ITR 340 · 2009 · HC
- CIT v. HDFC Bank Ltd.1,261 citing366 ITR 505 · 2014 · HC
- CIT v. De Beers India Minerals (P.) Ltd.371 citing21 Taxmann.com 214 · 2012 · HC
- CIT v. Toshoku Ltd.270 citing125 ITR 525 · 1980 · SC
- CIT v. Madras Refineries Ltd.94 citing266 ITR 170 · 2004 · HC
- CLSA Ltd. v. ITO(IT)21 citing305 ITR 208 · 2008
- CIT v. Toshoka Ltd.12 citing315 ITR 374 · 2009
- Dieter Eberhard Gustav v. CIT12 citing235 ITR 698
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGHAND
PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT:
These appeals by the assessee are arising out of different orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Chennai in ITA Nos.67/2014-15, 53/2015-16/CIT(A)-3, 47/16-17/A-3, 195/16-17/A-3 & 107/CIT(A)-3/2017-18 dated 28.02.2017, 27.10.2017, 29.09.2017 & 17.03.2020 respectively. The assessments were framed by the Joi
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 →- Sh Umang Uniyal vs. Commissioner Department Of Central Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 16 Oct 2026
- Paresh Textiles Prop Paresh Gudhka vs. Superintendent Range Iv Div VBombay · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Palladium Constructions PVT LTD. vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central TaxKarnataka · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Vk Construction vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - IiMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Sri Bhuvaneshwari And Co vs. The Deputy Commissioner (St)Madras · 15 Oct 2026