8.2 DCIT v. Ardeshi

7 DTR 51Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2008#10987 most cited
10

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2022.

Judgments citing 8.2 DCIT v. Ardeshi

DCIT, C-4, JAIPUR vs. M/S. JLC ELECTROMET PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 166/JPR/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Apr 2022AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra GargieyaFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 195Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

…1 आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ]U;kf;d lnL; ,oaJh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No.166/JP/2020 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2016-17 cuke M/s. JLC Electromet Pvt. Ltd. The DCIT Circle-4 Vs. E-153-A, Road No. 11-H, Jaipur VKI Area, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AABCJ 8786 A vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri Mahendra Gargieya jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by…

ASST CIT 19(3), MUMBAI vs. S.K. AGE EXPORTS, MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2524/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2013-14 Acit-19(3), M/S S.K. Age Exports, R. No.206M 2Nd Floor, 3-A, Shivsagar Estate, Dr. बनाम/ Matru Mandir, Annie Besant Road, Worli, Vs. Tardeo Raod, Mumbai-400018 Mumbai-400007 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No. Aaafs4534R

Section 143(3)Section 195

…resident agency companies have not made available any technical or managerial service and hence commission paid for such companies is a business profit and not technical services. 2.4.16 The Mumbai ITAT in the case of Ardeshi and Curstejee & Sons Ltd. (2008) 7 DTR 51 has held that the foreign agents right to receive the commission is acquired as and when services are rendered. Since services are rendered abroad, the right to receive the commission is consequentially acquired outside India. The accrual of Income is also outside India. Hence the commission income of foreign agent paid by Indian exporter is not cha…

M/S.KANNAN DEVAN HILLS PLANTATIONS CO. P. LTD,MUNNAR vs. THE ACIT, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the appeals filed

ITA 91/COCH/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Jan 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri George George K., Jm & Manjunatha G., Am

Section 80I

…i) Homefashions vs. ACIT ( I.T.A. No. 52/Coch/2015 dated 10/12/2015 ITAT Cochin) ii) CEAT International vs. CIT 237 ITR 859 (Bom.) iii) CIT vs. Toshoku Ltd. 125 ITR 525 (SC) iv) Armayesh Global 51 SOT 564 (Mumbai ITAT) v) Ardeshi and Cursetjee Sons Ltd. 7 DTR 51 (Mumbai ITAT) 12.4 For aforesaid reasons, we confirm the order of the CIT(A) on this issue. Thus ground No. 6 raised by the Revenue in I.T.A. No. 131/Coch/2017 is dismissed. 13. The seventh issue is with regard to the taxability of income from electricity operations. This issue is connected with the claim of deduction under section 80IA which w…

M/S.KANNAN DEVAN HILLS PLANTATIONS CO. P. LTD,MUNNAR vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the appeals filed

ITA 78/COCH/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Jan 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri George George K., Jm & Manjunatha G., Am

Section 80I

…i) Homefashions vs. ACIT ( I.T.A. No. 52/Coch/2015 dated 10/12/2015 ITAT Cochin) ii) CEAT International vs. CIT 237 ITR 859 (Bom.) iii) CIT vs. Toshoku Ltd. 125 ITR 525 (SC) iv) Armayesh Global 51 SOT 564 (Mumbai ITAT) v) Ardeshi and Cursetjee Sons Ltd. 7 DTR 51 (Mumbai ITAT) 12.4 For aforesaid reasons, we confirm the order of the CIT(A) on this issue. Thus ground No. 6 raised by the Revenue in I.T.A. No. 131/Coch/2017 is dismissed. 13. The seventh issue is with regard to the taxability of income from electricity operations. This issue is connected with the claim of deduction under section 80IA which w…

M/S.KANNAN DEVAN HILLS PLANTATIONS CO. P. LTD,MUNNAR vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the appeals filed

ITA 77/COCH/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri George George K., Jm & Manjunatha G., Am

Section 80I

…i) Homefashions vs. ACIT ( I.T.A. No. 52/Coch/2015 dated 10/12/2015 ITAT Cochin) ii) CEAT International vs. CIT 237 ITR 859 (Bom.) iii) CIT vs. Toshoku Ltd. 125 ITR 525 (SC) iv) Armayesh Global 51 SOT 564 (Mumbai ITAT) v) Ardeshi and Cursetjee Sons Ltd. 7 DTR 51 (Mumbai ITAT) 12.4 For aforesaid reasons, we confirm the order of the CIT(A) on this issue. Thus ground No. 6 raised by the Revenue in I.T.A. No. 131/Coch/2017 is dismissed. 13. The seventh issue is with regard to the taxability of income from electricity operations. This issue is connected with the claim of deduction under section 80IA which w…

THE ACIT, COCHIN vs. M/S. KANNAN DEVAN HILLS PLANTATIONS CO., P. LTD, IDUKKI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the appeals filed

ITA 164/COCH/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Jan 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri George George K., Jm & Manjunatha G., Am

Section 80I

…i) Homefashions vs. ACIT ( I.T.A. No. 52/Coch/2015 dated 10/12/2015 ITAT Cochin) ii) CEAT International vs. CIT 237 ITR 859 (Bom.) iii) CIT vs. Toshoku Ltd. 125 ITR 525 (SC) iv) Armayesh Global 51 SOT 564 (Mumbai ITAT) v) Ardeshi and Cursetjee Sons Ltd. 7 DTR 51 (Mumbai ITAT) 12.4 For aforesaid reasons, we confirm the order of the CIT(A) on this issue. Thus ground No. 6 raised by the Revenue in I.T.A. No. 131/Coch/2017 is dismissed. 13. The seventh issue is with regard to the taxability of income from electricity operations. This issue is connected with the claim of deduction under section 80IA which w…

THE ACIT, COCHIN vs. M/S. KANNAN DEVAN HILLS PLANTATIONS CO., P. LTD, IDUKKI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the appeals filed

ITA 163/COCH/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Jan 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri George George K., Jm & Manjunatha G., Am

Section 80I

…i) Homefashions vs. ACIT ( I.T.A. No. 52/Coch/2015 dated 10/12/2015 ITAT Cochin) ii) CEAT International vs. CIT 237 ITR 859 (Bom.) iii) CIT vs. Toshoku Ltd. 125 ITR 525 (SC) iv) Armayesh Global 51 SOT 564 (Mumbai ITAT) v) Ardeshi and Cursetjee Sons Ltd. 7 DTR 51 (Mumbai ITAT) 12.4 For aforesaid reasons, we confirm the order of the CIT(A) on this issue. Thus ground No. 6 raised by the Revenue in I.T.A. No. 131/Coch/2017 is dismissed. 13. The seventh issue is with regard to the taxability of income from electricity operations. This issue is connected with the claim of deduction under section 80IA which w…

ACIT 16(3), MUMBAI vs. S.K. AGE EXPORTS, MUMBAI

In the result all appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 5445/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Nov 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita Nos.3348,3349&5445/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12) Acit-16(3), Mumbai-400007 Vs. M/S S.K.Age Exports, 3-A, Shivsagar Estate, Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli, Mumbai-400018 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaafs 4534 R (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vivek Batra ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Hari Raheja सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 07/09/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 25/11/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Cit(A)-Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011- 12, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) Of I.T. Act. 2. Common Grievance Of The Revenue In All The Years Pertains To Deleting Disallowance Made On Account Of Payment Made For Export Commission On Which No Tds Was Deducted & Assessee Was Found To Be In Default By The Ao U/S.195 Of The I.T.Act. The Disallowance So Made By The Ao Was Deleted By The Cit(A) After Having Following Observation :- 2.4.6 Now I Proceed To Adjudicate On The Merits Of The Case. From The Facts Submitted, It Is Apparent That The Issue In Question Was Of Payment To A Non-Resident By Way Of Export Commission For Services Rendered Outside India On Which Payments Are Remitted Directly Abroad & As Such No Tax Was Required To Be Deducted U/S. 195 Of The Act. The Non-Resident Did Not Have Any Business Connection Or Dependent Agent In India & The Amount Paid Was Not Through Or From Any Property, Asset Or Source Of Income In India. As Such, The Amount Paid Is Not Income Which Is Chargeable Under The Provisions Of The Act & Hence, No Tax Was Deductible Therefrom. 2.4.7 I Am Fortified In The Above View By The Decision Of The Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Hari RahejaFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Batra
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 195(1)Section 9

…-resident agency companies have not made available any technical or managerial service and hence commission paid for such companies is a business profit and not technical services. 2.4.16 The Mumbai ITAT in the case of Ardeshi and Curstejee & Sons Ltd. (2008) 7 DTR 51 has held that the foreign agents right to receive the commission is acquired as and when services are rendered. Since services are rendered abroad, the right to receive the commission is consequentially acquired outside India. The accrual of Income is also outside India. Hence the commission income of foreign agent paid by Indian exporter is not cha…

ACIT 16(3), MUMBAI vs. S.K. AGE EXPORTS, MUMBAI

In the result all appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3349/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Nov 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita Nos.3348,3349&5445/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12) Acit-16(3), Mumbai-400007 Vs. M/S S.K.Age Exports, 3-A, Shivsagar Estate, Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli, Mumbai-400018 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaafs 4534 R (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vivek Batra ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Hari Raheja सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 07/09/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 25/11/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Cit(A)-Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011- 12, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) Of I.T. Act. 2. Common Grievance Of The Revenue In All The Years Pertains To Deleting Disallowance Made On Account Of Payment Made For Export Commission On Which No Tds Was Deducted & Assessee Was Found To Be In Default By The Ao U/S.195 Of The I.T.Act. The Disallowance So Made By The Ao Was Deleted By The Cit(A) After Having Following Observation :- 2.4.6 Now I Proceed To Adjudicate On The Merits Of The Case. From The Facts Submitted, It Is Apparent That The Issue In Question Was Of Payment To A Non-Resident By Way Of Export Commission For Services Rendered Outside India On Which Payments Are Remitted Directly Abroad & As Such No Tax Was Required To Be Deducted U/S. 195 Of The Act. The Non-Resident Did Not Have Any Business Connection Or Dependent Agent In India & The Amount Paid Was Not Through Or From Any Property, Asset Or Source Of Income In India. As Such, The Amount Paid Is Not Income Which Is Chargeable Under The Provisions Of The Act & Hence, No Tax Was Deductible Therefrom. 2.4.7 I Am Fortified In The Above View By The Decision Of The Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Hari RahejaFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Batra
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 195(1)Section 9

…-resident agency companies have not made available any technical or managerial service and hence commission paid for such companies is a business profit and not technical services. 2.4.16 The Mumbai ITAT in the case of Ardeshi and Curstejee & Sons Ltd. (2008) 7 DTR 51 has held that the foreign agents right to receive the commission is acquired as and when services are rendered. Since services are rendered abroad, the right to receive the commission is consequentially acquired outside India. The accrual of Income is also outside India. Hence the commission income of foreign agent paid by Indian exporter is not cha…

ACIT 16(3), MUMBAI vs. S.K. AGE EXPORTS, MUMBAI

In the result all appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3348/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Nov 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita Nos.3348,3349&5445/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12) Acit-16(3), Mumbai-400007 Vs. M/S S.K.Age Exports, 3-A, Shivsagar Estate, Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli, Mumbai-400018 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaafs 4534 R (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vivek Batra ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Hari Raheja सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 07/09/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 25/11/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Cit(A)-Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011- 12, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) Of I.T. Act. 2. Common Grievance Of The Revenue In All The Years Pertains To Deleting Disallowance Made On Account Of Payment Made For Export Commission On Which No Tds Was Deducted & Assessee Was Found To Be In Default By The Ao U/S.195 Of The I.T.Act. The Disallowance So Made By The Ao Was Deleted By The Cit(A) After Having Following Observation :- 2.4.6 Now I Proceed To Adjudicate On The Merits Of The Case. From The Facts Submitted, It Is Apparent That The Issue In Question Was Of Payment To A Non-Resident By Way Of Export Commission For Services Rendered Outside India On Which Payments Are Remitted Directly Abroad & As Such No Tax Was Required To Be Deducted U/S. 195 Of The Act. The Non-Resident Did Not Have Any Business Connection Or Dependent Agent In India & The Amount Paid Was Not Through Or From Any Property, Asset Or Source Of Income In India. As Such, The Amount Paid Is Not Income Which Is Chargeable Under The Provisions Of The Act & Hence, No Tax Was Deductible Therefrom. 2.4.7 I Am Fortified In The Above View By The Decision Of The Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Hari RahejaFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Batra
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 195(1)Section 9

…-resident agency companies have not made available any technical or managerial service and hence commission paid for such companies is a business profit and not technical services. 2.4.16 The Mumbai ITAT in the case of Ardeshi and Curstejee & Sons Ltd. (2008) 7 DTR 51 has held that the foreign agents right to receive the commission is acquired as and when services are rendered. Since services are rendered abroad, the right to receive the commission is consequentially acquired outside India. The accrual of Income is also outside India. Hence the commission income of foreign agent paid by Indian exporter is not cha…