Apurva Goswami v. DDIT, Chandigarh

196 ITD 10Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2022#23480 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2023 to 2023.

Issues it is cited on

section 195section 19section 133genuineness of the transactionsection 133(6)section 13personcompanyindiabusinessdocumentinterest

Judgments citing Apurva Goswami v. DDIT, Chandigarh

ACIT CIRCLE-2(1), GHAZIABAD vs. MANOJ RAIZADA, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and Cross Objection of the assessee both are dismissed

ITA 5/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2017-18 & Co No. 28/Del/2021 Asstt. Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Mayank Choudhary, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 37(1)Section 46ASection 9

…ut business profit and in absence of PE of such agents in India, such commission payment was not taxable in India:- & CO No. 28/Del/2021 i) ACIT vs. Kapoor Industries Ltd. (2021) 187 ITD 603(Delhi-Trib.) ii) Apurva Goswami vs. Dy. DIT (Int. Taxation) (2022) 196 ITD 10 (Delhi Trib) iii) Pr. CIT vs. Puma Sports India (P.) Ltd. (2021) 434 ITR 69 (Kar) SLP filed by the Department stands dismissed as reported in (2022) 285 Taxman 191 (SC). 15. Once we hold that the impugned payment by the assessee is not FTS the assertions made in the grounds of the Revenue do not have legs to stand. Moreover, these grounds do not…

ACIT CIRCLE-28(1), DELHI vs. SAM OVERSEAS, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 169/DEL/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jun 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannua N D Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

For Appellant: Sr. Advocate
Section 195

…nn.com 212 (Ahmedabad-Trib)]. 52.6 While concluding with the aforesaid submissions, the assessee-appellant seeks to rely upon the recent decision of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Delhi Bench in the case of Apurva Goswami vs. DDIT, Chandigarh reported in [196 ITD 10] wherein it was held that commission payments made by assessee Cross I.T.A. Nos. 1695/Del/2020 & 169/Del/2021 to non-resident agents/service providers for rendering services like sales promotion, marketing publicity and procuring sales order etc. was not FTS but business profit and in absence of permanent establishment of these service providers…

SAM OVERSEAS ,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE- 24(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1695/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jun 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannua N D Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

For Appellant: Sr. Advocate
Section 195

…nn.com 212 (Ahmedabad-Trib)]. 52.6 While concluding with the aforesaid submissions, the assessee-appellant seeks to rely upon the recent decision of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Delhi Bench in the case of Apurva Goswami vs. DDIT, Chandigarh reported in [196 ITD 10] wherein it was held that commission payments made by assessee Cross I.T.A. Nos. 1695/Del/2020 & 169/Del/2021 to non-resident agents/service providers for rendering services like sales promotion, marketing publicity and procuring sales order etc. was not FTS but business profit and in absence of permanent establishment of these service providers…

Apurva Goswami v. DDIT, Chandigarh (196 ITD 10) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax