What is 1. S.A. Builders Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

An element of profit is not an essential ingredient for a receipt to be taxable as income, even if it is a reimbursement of costs.

How many judgments cite 1. S.A. Builders Ltd. v. CIT?

38 judgments on BharatTax cite 1. S.A. Builders Ltd. v. CIT (268 ITR 1), spanning 2015 to 2025.

1. S.A. Builders Ltd. v. CIT (268 ITR 1)

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRLCE - 1(1), BENGALURU vs. APPLIED MATERIALS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, BENGALURU

ITA 1296/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Dr. Divya K.J., CIT(DR)(ITAT), BengaluruFor Respondent: Shri Suryanarayan, AR

Section 133ASection 195Section 201Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vii)

…es and was under the statutory obligation to deduct TDS. In contrast, the statutory obligation is to deduct TDS under section 195 on the payments made to overseas entity towards "Fee for technical services". 15. In the case of Danfoss Industries P Ltd (2004) 268 ITR 1, the Hon'ble AAR held as follows: "The thrust of the argument of the applicant is that there is no income element in the service fee payable by the applicant and that it is only reimbursement of the costs to Danfoss Singapore. It is important to remember that an element of profit is not an essential ingredient of a receipt to be taxable as an inco…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-1(1), BENGALURU vs. APPLIED MATERIALS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, BENGALURU

ITA 1295/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Respondent by

Section 133ASection 195Section 201Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vii)

…ees and was under the statutory obligation to deduct TDS. In contrast, the statutory obligation is to deduct TDS under section 195 on the payments made to overseas entity towards "Fee for technical services". 15. In the case of Danfoss Industries P Ltd (2004) 268 ITR 1, the Hon'ble AAR held as follows: "The thrust of the argument of the applicant is that there is no income element in the service fee payable by the applicant and that it is only reimbursement of the costs to Danfoss Singapore. It is important to remember that an element of profit is not an essential ingredient of a receipt to be taxable as an incom…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE - 1(1), BENGALURU vs. APPLIED MATERIALS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, BENGALURU

ITA 1294/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Dr. Divya K.J., CIT(DR)(ITAT), BengaluruFor Respondent: Shri Suryanarayan, AR

Section 133ASection 195Section 201Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vii)

…es and was under the statutory obligation to deduct TDS. In contrast, the statutory obligation is to deduct TDS under section 195 on the payments made to overseas entity towards "Fee for technical services". 15. In the case of Danfoss Industries P Ltd (2004) 268 ITR 1, the Hon'ble AAR held as follows: "The thrust of the argument of the applicant is that there is no income element in the service fee payable by the applicant and that it is only reimbursement of the costs to Danfoss Singapore. It is important to remember that an element of profit is not an essential ingredient of a receipt to be taxable as an inco…

PMP AUTO COMPONENTS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 7(3)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in AY 2011-12 is dismissed

ITA 587/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

Section 92B(1)

…assed in ITA No.7724/Mum/2014, held that the investment in shares is a capital account transaction. In this regard, the Tribunal followed the decision rendered by Hon’ble jurisdictional Bombay High Court in the case of Vodafone Services India (P) Ltd vs. UOI (268 ITR 1)(Bom). It is pertinent to note that the decision in the case of Vodafone Services India (P) Ltd was rendered in respect of inbound investment. However, the principle laid down in the above said case was followed by the Tribunal in AY 2010-11 with the following observations:- “17. The aforesaid principles and ratio will equally apply to out bound in…

GLOBAL E-BUSINESS OPERATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5(3)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 174/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri Padam Chand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Harinder Kumar, D.R

Section 144(3)Section 37Section 92C

…under section 40(a)(i) of the Act, without evaluating the fact that the provisions of section 195 of the Act are not applicable to such remittances. 2.12. The learned AO has erred in law and on facts by relying on decision of Danfoss Industries P Ltd (2004) 268 ITR 1 pronounced by the Hon'ble Authority for Advance Ruling ("AAR"). The transaction covered by the said decision is very different on facts as compared to the Appellant and the same cannot be applied here. 2.13. The learned AO has erred in law and on facts, in disregarding that the remittance towards recovery of ESOP charges is not taxable under the p…

HEWLETT PACKARD (INDIA) SOFTWARE OPERATION PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 413/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Oct 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariit(Tp)A No.413/Bang/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Padam Chand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R

Section 192Section 195Section 37Section 40Section 92C

…owance under section 40(a)(i) of the Act, without evaluating the fact that the provisions of section 195 of the Act are not applicable to such remittances. 1.12. The NFAC has erred in law and on facts by relying on decision of Danfoss Industries P Ltd (2004) 268 ITR 1 pronounced by the Hon’ble Authority for Advance Ruling (‘AAR’). The transaction covered by the said decision is very different on facts as compared to that of the Appellant. Hence, the ruling cannot be applied in the Appellant’s case. 1.13. The NFAC has erred in law and on facts, in disregarding that the remittance towards ESOP cross charges is no…

HEWLETT PACKARD (INDIA) SOFTWARE OPERATION PRIVATE LIMITED,2016-17 vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 213/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Oct 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariit(Tp)A No.213/Bang/2021 Assessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Padam Chand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Capt. Pradeep Arya, D.R

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 92C

…ection 40(a)(i) of the Act without evaluating the fact that the provision of section 195 of the Act is prima facie not applicable on such remittances. 2.12 The learned AO has erred in law and on facts by relying on decision of Danfoss Industries P Ltd (2004) 268 ITR 1 pronounced by the Hon'ble Authority for Advance Ruling ("AAR") as the same is very specific to the given transaction of that Appellant. The transaction covered by the said decision is very different on facts as compared to the Appellant and the same cannot be applied here. 2.13. The learned AO has erred in law and on facts, in disregarding that th…

GLOBAL E-BUSINESS OPERATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 212/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Sri.P.C.Kincha, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 37Section 92C

…ection 40(a)(i) of the Act without evaluating the fact that the provision of section 195 of the Act is prima facie not applicable on such remittances. 2.12. The learned AO has erred in law and on facts by relying on decision of Danfoss Industries P Ltd (2004) 268 ITR 1 pronounced by the Hon'ble Authority for Advance Ruling ("AAR") as the same is very specific to the given transaction of that Assessee. The transaction covered by the said decision is very different on facts as compared to the Appellant and the same cannot be applied here. 2.13. The learned AO has erred in law and on facts, in disregarding that the…

EIT SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 210/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Aug 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Padam Chand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Karanth, D.R

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 92D

…. 20.7 The Learned AO has relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of GVK Industries vs Income Tax Officer [2015] 54 taxmann.com 347 (SC) and on the ruling of Authority for Advance Rulings (“AAR”) in the case of Danfoss Industries P Ltd (2004) 268 ITR 1. IT(TP)A No.210/Bang/2021 EIT Services India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 59 of 66 20.8 The Learned AO also stated that the ESOP expenditure booked by the Appellant and reimbursed to the holding company is a fictitious expenditure and is notional in nature. Also, that it is merely a strategy/ colourable device adopted for avoidance of income tax prim…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. DELOITTE TOUCHE TOHMASTU, GURGAON

ITA 530/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No.6703/Del/2015, A.Y. 2008-09 Ita No.5760/Del/2015, A.Y. 2009-10 Ita No.5759/Del/2015, A.Y. 2010-11 Ita No.530/Del/2016, A.Y. 2011-12

…ent of reimbursement does not hold good as a gross payment is taxable as against the net profit and in that context the Hon’ble Kerala High Court judgement in Cochin Refinaries Ltd. (222) ITR 534 and Hon’ble AAR decision in case of Danfoss Industries P. Ltd. (268 ITR 1) and Timken India Ltd. 273 ITR 67 were relied. 5.1.3 Ld. DR also submitted that Ld. F.A.A. erred to give findings on the basis of invoices filed by assessee. It was submitted in this context that based on perusal of invoices, Ld. F.A.A. has erred to observe that the recoveries made by the appellant from it, members were in the ratio of their turno…

DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), NEW DELHI vs. M/S DELOITTE TOUCHE TOHMASTU, GURGAON

ITA 6703/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No.6703/Del/2015, A.Y. 2008-09 Ita No.5760/Del/2015, A.Y. 2009-10 Ita No.5759/Del/2015, A.Y. 2010-11 Ita No.530/Del/2016, A.Y. 2011-12

…ent of reimbursement does not hold good as a gross payment is taxable as against the net profit and in that context the Hon’ble Kerala High Court judgement in Cochin Refinaries Ltd. (222) ITR 534 and Hon’ble AAR decision in case of Danfoss Industries P. Ltd. (268 ITR 1) and Timken India Ltd. 273 ITR 67 were relied. 5.1.3 Ld. DR also submitted that Ld. F.A.A. erred to give findings on the basis of invoices filed by assessee. It was submitted in this context that based on perusal of invoices, Ld. F.A.A. has erred to observe that the recoveries made by the appellant from it, members were in the ratio of their turno…

DCIT, INTL. TAXATION, NEW DELHI vs. DELOITTE TOUCHE TOHMASTU, GURGAON

ITA 5760/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No.6703/Del/2015, A.Y. 2008-09 Ita No.5760/Del/2015, A.Y. 2009-10 Ita No.5759/Del/2015, A.Y. 2010-11 Ita No.530/Del/2016, A.Y. 2011-12

…ent of reimbursement does not hold good as a gross payment is taxable as against the net profit and in that context the Hon’ble Kerala High Court judgement in Cochin Refinaries Ltd. (222) ITR 534 and Hon’ble AAR decision in case of Danfoss Industries P. Ltd. (268 ITR 1) and Timken India Ltd. 273 ITR 67 were relied. 5.1.3 Ld. DR also submitted that Ld. F.A.A. erred to give findings on the basis of invoices filed by assessee. It was submitted in this context that based on perusal of invoices, Ld. F.A.A. has erred to observe that the recoveries made by the appellant from it, members were in the ratio of their turno…

DCIT, INTL. TAXATION, NEW DELHI vs. DELOITTE TOUCHE TOHMASTU, GURGAON

ITA 5759/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Apr 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No.6703/Del/2015, A.Y. 2008-09 Ita No.5760/Del/2015, A.Y. 2009-10 Ita No.5759/Del/2015, A.Y. 2010-11 Ita No.530/Del/2016, A.Y. 2011-12

…ent of reimbursement does not hold good as a gross payment is taxable as against the net profit and in that context the Hon’ble Kerala High Court judgement in Cochin Refinaries Ltd. (222) ITR 534 and Hon’ble AAR decision in case of Danfoss Industries P. Ltd. (268 ITR 1) and Timken India Ltd. 273 ITR 67 were relied. 5.1.3 Ld. DR also submitted that Ld. F.A.A. erred to give findings on the basis of invoices filed by assessee. It was submitted in this context that based on perusal of invoices, Ld. F.A.A. has erred to observe that the recoveries made by the appellant from it, members were in the ratio of their turno…

ITO (INTL. TAXATION), NEW DELHI vs. M/S ASIAN HOTELS NORTH LTD., DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 210/DEL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N.C. Swain, CIT-DR

Section 115ASection 195Section 195(2)Section 9(1)(vi)

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “D”: NEW DELHI BEFORE N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Asstt. Year: 2013-14 ITO (Intt. Taxation) Vs. Asian Hotels North Ltd. Ward 1 (1)(1) Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi. MG/Ring Road, Delhi PAN AAACA0125H (Appellant) (Respondent) Department by: Shri N.C. Swain, CIT-DR Assessee by : Shri M.P. Rastogi, Advocate Date of Hearing 16/02/2022 Date of 15/03/2022 pronouncement O R D E R PER ASTHA CHANDRA, JM The appeal filed by the Revenue is against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-42, New Delhi (“CIT(A)…