Carborandum Co. v. CIT (108 ITR 335)

DCIT (It) -3(2) (2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Marriott Internation Servicesal Design & Construction, Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the Assessing Officer is thus dismissed

ITA 2289/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

…octor. On the other hand, if the same doctor teaches or trains student on the aspect of diagnosis or techniques of surgery, that will amount to making available the technical knowledge and experience of the doctor. In the case of Carborandum Co. v. CIT [1977] 108 ITR 335 (SC), a foreign company entered into an agreement with an Indian company for rendering technical and know how services to the Indian company. In lieu of those services, the foreign company was to receive from the Indian company an annual fee equal to three per cent of the net sale proceeds of the products manufactured by the Indian company every…

DCIT (It) -3(2) (2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Marriott International Design & Construction Services, Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the Assessing Officer is thus dismissed

ITA 2288/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

Section 143Section 195Section 9

…octor. On the other hand, if the same doctor teaches or trains student on the aspect of diagnosis or techniques of surgery, that will amount to making available the technical knowledge and experience of the doctor. In the case of Carborandum Co. v. CIT [1977] 108 ITR 335 (SC), a foreign company entered into an agreement with an Indian company for rendering technical and know how services to the Indian company. In lieu of those services, the foreign company was to receive from the Indian company an annual fee equal to three per cent of the net sale proceeds of the products manufactured by the Indian company every…

DCIT (It) -3(2) (2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Marriott International Design & Construction Services, Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the Assessing Officer is thus dismissed

ITA 2286/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Section 143Section 195Section 9

…octor. On the other hand, if the same doctor teaches or trains student on the aspect of diagnosis or techniques of surgery, that will amount to making available the technical knowledge and experience of the doctor. In the case of Carborandum Co. v. CIT [1977] 108 ITR 335 (SC), a foreign company entered into an agreement with an Indian company for rendering technical and know how services to the Indian company. In lieu of those services, the foreign company was to receive from the Indian company an annual fee equal to three per cent of the net sale proceeds of the products manufactured by the Indian company every…

DCIT (It) 2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Credit Suisse (Singapore) Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue for assessment year 2015–16

ITA 7262/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala a/wFor Respondent: Shri Milind Chavan, Sr. DR

Section 250

…taxable territories, it follows that the income accruing or arising abroad through or from any business connection in India cannot be deemed to accrue or arise in India (See CIT v. R.D. Aggarwal and Co. [1965] 56 ITR 20 (SC) and Carborundum Co. v. CIT [1977] 108 ITR 335 (SC) which are decided on the basis of s. 42 of the Indian I.T. Act, 1922, which corresponds to s. 9(1)(i ) of the Act). In the instant case, the non-resident assessees did not carry on any business operations in the taxable territories. They acted as selling agents outside India. The receipt in India of the sale proceeds of tobacco remitted or c…

DCIT(It)- 2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Credit Suisse (Singapore) Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue for assessment year 2015–16

ITA 6098/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala a/wFor Respondent: Shri Milind Chavan, Sr. DR

Section 250

…taxable territories, it follows that the income accruing or arising abroad through or from any business connection in India cannot be deemed to accrue or arise in India (See CIT v. R.D. Aggarwal and Co. [1965] 56 ITR 20 (SC) and Carborundum Co. v. CIT [1977] 108 ITR 335 (SC) which are decided on the basis of s. 42 of the Indian I.T. Act, 1922, which corresponds to s. 9(1)(i ) of the Act). In the instant case, the non-resident assessees did not carry on any business operations in the taxable territories. They acted as selling agents outside India. The receipt in India of the sale proceeds of tobacco remitted or c…

DCIT Central Circle-31, New Delhi vs. Cheslind Textiles Ltd., Rajasthan

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5929/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Anubhav Sharmaita No. 5929/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Dcit, Vs Cheslind Textiles Ltd., Central Circle-31, Kharigram, P.B. No. 28, Post New Delhi-110055 Office-Gulabpura, Distt. Bhilwara, Rajasthan-311021 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcc2435K Assessee By : Sh. S. S. Nagar, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Shashi Kajle, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 02.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 01.06.2022

For Appellant: Sh. S. S. Nagar, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Shashi Kajle, Sr. DR

Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…untry. There is absolutely no territorial nexus with India as far as the non-residents are concerned. The nonresident's source of income outside India and accrues and arises outside India. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Caroorandum Co. v. CIT (1977) 108 ITR 335, has held that "the carrying on of activities or operations in India is essential to make the nonresident have business connection in India in order that he may be liable to tax in respect of the income attributable to that business connection the CBDT in Circular No. 17(XXXVII) of 1953 dated 17th July, 1953 has stated as follows:- "Foreign agen…

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)

…-resident assessee for services rendered outside India cannot, therefore, be deemed to be incomes which have either accrued or arisen in India-CIT vs. R.D. Aggarwal & Co. (1965) 56 ITR 20 (SC): TC39R. 1098 and Carborandum Co. US. CIT 1977 CTR (SC) 209: (1977) 108 ITR 335 (SC): TC39R.1145 relied on." 32 DCIT, Circle-4, Jaipur VS M/s. JLC Electromet Pvt. Ltd. Jaipur 8.6 DIT (International Taxation) vs. credit Lyonnais (2016) 95 CCH 0141 Mum HC: "Business Expenditure-Interest, commission, brokerage etc. to a resident-Non applicability of provisions of 40(a)(i)-During Assessment Year 2001-02,- Assessee was appoint…

Ajay Arora, Kanpur vs. Addl. CIT, Kanpur

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 90/LKW/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow25 Nov 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora

Section 143(3)Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

…arity on facts, on the edifice of which only the law could be applied. In sum 4.1 There is in fact no ambiguity in law, being well settled by the Apex Court, even as apparent from the cited decisions, to which others by it, as in Carborandum Co. v. CIT [1977] 108 ITR 335 (SC); Barendra Prasad Ray v. ITO [1981] 129 ITR 295 (SC); CIT v. T.I. and M. Sales Ltd. [1987] 166 ITR 93 (SC); and GVK Industries Ltd. v. ITO [2015] 371 ITR 453 (SC) could be added with profit, and it is only the facts of each case which are thus determinative of a decision either way, even as apparent from the reading of the said decisions.The…

M/S. Bain & Company India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ITO (TDS) (International Taxation), New Delhi

ITA 2845/DEL/2016[2009-10 (F.Y. 2008-09)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Nov 2021

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Sinha &For Respondent: Shri Umesh Takiyar, Sr. DR

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : D : NEW DELHI (Through Virtual Hearing) BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2009-10 Bain & Company India Pvt. Ltd., Vs ITO (TDS), 5th Floor, Building No.8A, International Taxation, DLF Cyber City, Ward-3(2), Gurgaon. New Delhi. PAN : AACCB8671R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Himanshu Sinha & Shri Bhuvan Dhupar, Advocates Revenue by : Shri Umesh Takiyar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 17.08.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 10.11.2021 ORDER PER R.K. PANDA, AM: This appeal filed by the assessee is…

Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence Private Limited vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax

C.A. No.-008733-008734 - 2018Supreme Court02 Mar 2021

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN

…of the Income Tax Act, by way of an amendment through the Finance Act 1976,37 was to introduce source-based taxation for income in the hands of a non-resident by way of interest, royalty and fees for technical services. In Carborandum & Co. v. CIT, (1977) 2 SCC 862, this Court, applying residence-based rules of taxation, held that the technical 37 Act 66 of 1976, (w.e.f 1-6-1976). 104 service fees received by the non-resident assessee (relatable to the assessment year 1957-1958) could only be deemed to accrue in India if such income could be attributed to a business connection in India. In the…

Giesecke & Devrient India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 3865/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 May 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri O.P. Kant

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C(2)Section 92C(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘I-1’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.3865/Del./2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/s. Giesecke & Devrient Vs. DCIT, India Pvt. Ltd., Circle-10(1), Corporate Officer-Plot #57, New Delhi Sector-44, Gurgaon PAN:AABCG4223D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Harpreet Singh Ajmani, Adv. & Shri Rohan Khare, Adv. Department by Shri Surender Pal, CIT(DR) Date of hearing 03.02.2020 Date of pronouncement 01.05.2020 ORDER PER O.P. KANT, A.M.: This appeal by the assessee is directed against fi…

Knight Frank (India) P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 2(2), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5050/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm

Section 143(3)Section 40Section 5(2)Section 7Section 80CSection 9(1)

…taxable territories, it follows that the income accruing or arising abroad through or from any business connection in India cannot be deemed to accrue or arise in India [See CIT vs. R.D. Aggarwal & Co. (1965) 56 ITR 20 (SC) and Carborandum Co. vs. CIT (1977) 108 ITR 335 (SC) which are decided on the basis of s. 42 of the Indian IT Act, 1922, which corresponds to s. 9(1)(i) of the Act]. 9. In the instant case, the non-resident assessees did not carry on any business operations in the taxable territories. They acted as selling agents outside India. The receipt in India of the sale proceeds of tobacco remitted or…

Lg Electronics Inc., Korea (Lgek), Noida vs. DCIT, Circle- 2(2)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result all the 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed with above direction for statistical purposes

ITA 3327/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Delhi02 Sept 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri G. K. Dhall, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 147

…US Corporation was an employee of the Indian company and, therefore, reimbursement of his salary by the Indian company to the US Corporation did not constitute “fees for technical services”. c) The Supreme Court in the case of Carborandum Co. vs. CIT : [1977] 108 ITR 336(SC) held that foreign technical personnel whose services were made available to the Indian company outside India and who were employed by the Indian company on the basis of the agreement between the foreign company and the Indian company and were under the latter's control were employees of the Indian company. d) The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the…

M/S. Lg Electronics Inc., Korea (Lgek), Noida vs. DCIT (International Taxation), Noida

In the result all the 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed with above direction for statistical purposes

ITA 1946/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: HeardITAT Delhi02 Sept 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri G. K. Dhall, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 147

…US Corporation was an employee of the Indian company and, therefore, reimbursement of his salary by the Indian company to the US Corporation did not constitute “fees for technical services”. c) The Supreme Court in the case of Carborandum Co. vs. CIT : [1977] 108 ITR 336(SC) held that foreign technical personnel whose services were made available to the Indian company outside India and who were employed by the Indian company on the basis of the agreement between the foreign company and the Indian company and were under the latter's control were employees of the Indian company. d) The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the…

Lg Electronics Inc., Korea (Lgek), Noida vs. DCIT, Circle- Noida, International Taxation, Noida

In the result all the 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed with above direction for statistical purposes

ITA 6916/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: HeardITAT Delhi02 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri G. K. Dhall, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 147

…US Corporation was an employee of the Indian company and, therefore, reimbursement of his salary by the Indian company to the US Corporation did not constitute “fees for technical services”. c) The Supreme Court in the case of Carborandum Co. vs. CIT : [1977] 108 ITR 336(SC) held that foreign technical personnel whose services were made available to the Indian company outside India and who were employed by the Indian company on the basis of the agreement between the foreign company and the Indian company and were under the latter's control were employees of the Indian company. d) The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the…