Burt Hill Design (P) Ltd. v. Dy. DIT(IT)

164 ITD 697Income Tax Appellate Tribunal#23069 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2020 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 195Section 201(1)Section 201(1A)Section 40(a)(i)Section 9(1)(vii)

Judgments citing Burt Hill Design (P) Ltd. v. Dy. DIT(IT)

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BENGLAURU, BENGALURU vs. GOLDMAN SACHS SERVICES PVT LTD, BENGALURU

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

ITA 1242/BANG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Sri Sharat Rao, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 195Section 201(1)Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

…iness Services India (P.) Ltd (supra), has been upheald by Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in Abbey Business Services India (P.) Ltd.'s case (supra). 35. Hon'ble Ahmedabad Tribunal in the case of Burt Hill Design (P) Ltd. v. Dy. DIT(IT) [2017] 79 taxmann.com 459/164 ITD 697, on identical facts, as in the case of the present assessee before us, took the view that, there was no liability to deduct tax at source u/s.195 when payments were made by way of reimbursement. Based on the above detailed analysis of various contrary decisions on the issue, we are of the view that the decisions relied by revenue are distinguish…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BENGALURU vs. GOLDMAN SACHS SERVICES PVT. LTD, BENGALURU

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

ITA 1241/BANG/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Aug 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Sri Sharat Rao, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 195Section 201(1)Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

…iness Services India (P.) Ltd (supra), has been upheald by Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in Abbey Business Services India (P.) Ltd.'s case (supra). 35. Hon'ble Ahmedabad Tribunal in the case of Burt Hill Design (P) Ltd. v. Dy. DIT(IT) [2017] 79 taxmann.com 459/164 ITD 697, on identical facts, as in the case of the present assessee before us, took the view that, there was no liability to deduct tax at source u/s.195 when payments were made by way of reimbursement. Based on the above detailed analysis of various contrary decisions on the issue, we are of the view that the decisions relied by revenue are distinguish…

DDIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. YUM! RESTAURANTS (ASIA) PTE LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6018/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jul 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.6018/Del/2012 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year 2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. Satpal Gulati, CIT DRFor Respondent: Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Adv
Section 143(3)Section 234B

…s income. It was further stressed that as per the DTAA, income attributable to the PE only is taxable in India. Reliance was placed on the decision of Ahmadabad Bench of Tribunal in Burt Hill Design (P.) Ltd. vs DDIT (International taxation) (Ahmedabad ITAT-164 ITD 697). 9. Now, coming to the next aspect of the issue, it was pointed out that as per Article 12 of DTAA, FTS is taxable i.e. if ‘make available clause’ is fulfilled, which is not the case of the assessee. It was also pointed out that in the absence of any element of income, it is a case of cost to cost reimbursement 7 Assessment Year 2008-09 and…

Burt Hill Design (P) Ltd. v. Dy. DIT(IT) (164 ITD 697) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax