Carborandum Co. v. CIT

108 ITR 335Supreme Court of India1977#1314 most cited
87

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Carborandum Co. v. CIT · 108 ITR 335 · Section 9(1)(i) · Section 5(2) · Section 163 · Section 194C · deputed employees · expatriate taxability · secondment agreement · non-resident income accrual · tax liability foreign company · lien employment foreign entity

Sections most often in play

Section 234BSection 5(2)Section 9(1)(i)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 194CSection 234C
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

bright line testamp expendituresection 42comparable uncontrolled price methodsection 92(1)cost plus methodfunctional analysissection 80jjasection 80jjaasection 163section 92c(3)section 9(1)(i)

Judgments citing Carborandum Co. v. CIT

DDIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sumitomo Corporation, New Delhi

Appeal are allowed

ITA 3696/DEL/2014[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jul 2019AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 234B

…a Harima Heavy Industries Limited 288 ITR 408 (SC) ii. Hyundai Heavy Industries Company Limited 210 CTR 178 (SC) iii. CIT vs. Toshoku Ltd. 125 ITR 525 (SC) iv. DCIT vs. Alcatel 47 ITD 275 v. CIT vs. Fried Krupp Industries 128 ITR 27 vi. Carborandum Co vs. CIT 108 ITR 335 As regards the risk and responsibility, the Ld. AR submitted that it is evident name of SSNNL as the consigner. This read with the provisions of Article 24.1 (Transfer of Ownership), clearly exhibits the intention of the contracting parties. Merely by stating that assessee was responsible for risk and responsibility of the equipment, does not, in…

DDIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sumitomo Corporation, New Delhi

Appeal are allowed

ITA 3695/DEL/2014[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jul 2019AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 234B

…a Harima Heavy Industries Limited 288 ITR 408 (SC) ii. Hyundai Heavy Industries Company Limited 210 CTR 178 (SC) iii. CIT vs. Toshoku Ltd. 125 ITR 525 (SC) iv. DCIT vs. Alcatel 47 ITD 275 v. CIT vs. Fried Krupp Industries 128 ITR 27 vi. Carborandum Co vs. CIT 108 ITR 335 As regards the risk and responsibility, the Ld. AR submitted that it is evident name of SSNNL as the consigner. This read with the provisions of Article 24.1 (Transfer of Ownership), clearly exhibits the intention of the contracting parties. Merely by stating that assessee was responsible for risk and responsibility of the equipment, does not, in…

Sumitomo Corporation, Delhi vs. DDIT, New Delhi

Appeal are allowed

ITA 3677/DEL/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jul 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 234B

…a Harima Heavy Industries Limited 288 ITR 408 (SC) ii. Hyundai Heavy Industries Company Limited 210 CTR 178 (SC) iii. CIT vs. Toshoku Ltd. 125 ITR 525 (SC) iv. DCIT vs. Alcatel 47 ITD 275 v. CIT vs. Fried Krupp Industries 128 ITR 27 vi. Carborandum Co vs. CIT 108 ITR 335 As regards the risk and responsibility, the Ld. AR submitted that it is evident name of SSNNL as the consigner. This read with the provisions of Article 24.1 (Transfer of Ownership), clearly exhibits the intention of the contracting parties. Merely by stating that assessee was responsible for risk and responsibility of the equipment, does not, in…

Sumitomo Corporation, Delhi vs. DDIT, New Delhi

Appeal are allowed

ITA 3676/DEL/2014[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jul 2019AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 234B

…a Harima Heavy Industries Limited 288 ITR 408 (SC) ii. Hyundai Heavy Industries Company Limited 210 CTR 178 (SC) iii. CIT vs. Toshoku Ltd. 125 ITR 525 (SC) iv. DCIT vs. Alcatel 47 ITD 275 v. CIT vs. Fried Krupp Industries 128 ITR 27 vi. Carborandum Co vs. CIT 108 ITR 335 As regards the risk and responsibility, the Ld. AR submitted that it is evident name of SSNNL as the consigner. This read with the provisions of Article 24.1 (Transfer of Ownership), clearly exhibits the intention of the contracting parties. Merely by stating that assessee was responsible for risk and responsibility of the equipment, does not, in…

Sumitomo Corporation, New Delhi vs. DDIT, New Delhi

Appeal are allowed

ITA 3675/DEL/2014[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jul 2019AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 234B

…a Harima Heavy Industries Limited 288 ITR 408 (SC) ii. Hyundai Heavy Industries Company Limited 210 CTR 178 (SC) iii. CIT vs. Toshoku Ltd. 125 ITR 525 (SC) iv. DCIT vs. Alcatel 47 ITD 275 v. CIT vs. Fried Krupp Industries 128 ITR 27 vi. Carborandum Co vs. CIT 108 ITR 335 As regards the risk and responsibility, the Ld. AR submitted that it is evident name of SSNNL as the consigner. This read with the provisions of Article 24.1 (Transfer of Ownership), clearly exhibits the intention of the contracting parties. Merely by stating that assessee was responsible for risk and responsibility of the equipment, does not, in…

DCIT- (It)-3 (3)(2), Mumbai vs. Venu Raman Kumar, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2977/MUM/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jun 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G S Pannu, Vice- & Shri Pawan Singhassessment Year : 2006-07 Dcit-(It)-3(3)(2), Venu Raman Kumar, Mumbai. Flat No.2, Hermes House –Iii, Vs. Worli Sea Face, Mumbai 400 025. Pan Abapk9122E (Appellant) Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri V SreekarFor Respondent: S/Shri Vijay Mehta, Anuj Kisnadwala &
Section 143(3)Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “I”, MUMBAI Before Shri G S Pannu, Vice-President & Shri Pawan Singh, Judicial Member Assessment Year : 2006-07 DCIT-(IT)-3(3)(2), Venu Raman Kumar, Mumbai. Flat No.2, Hermes House –III, Vs. Worli Sea Face, Mumbai 400 025. PAN ABAPK9122E (Appellant) Respondent) Appellant By : Shri V Sreekar Respondent By : S/Shri Vijay Mehta, Anuj Kisnadwala & R.C Jain Date of Hearing :14.05.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 19.06.2019 O R D E R Per G S Pannu, Vice-President This appeal is directed against the order of the CIT(A)-57, Mumbai, dated 05.02.2018, which in turn h…

Knight Frank (India) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT - 2(2)(1), Mumbai

ITA 2842/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jun 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Soodm/S Knight Frank (India) Pvt. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Ltd. C/O Kalyaniwalla & Mistry Tax-2(2)(1), Llp, 2Nd Floor, Esplanade Room No. 548, 5Th Floor, Vs. House No. 29, Hazarimal Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Marg, Somani Marg, Fort, Mumbai. Mumbai 400 001 Pan – Aaack1544J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri M.M. Golvala &For Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Singh, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40Section 9(2)

…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 c…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bangalore vs. M/S. Cheslind Textiles Ltd., Bangalore

In the result appeal filed by revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1639/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Jun 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Ms. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Vipul Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vikas Suryavamshi, Addl. CIT (DR)
Section 142Section 143Section 195Section 195(1)Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…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 Page 8 of 9 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 conneition 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 agent…

Jas Forwarding Worldwide Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

The appeal of the Assessee is allowed whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3296/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 May 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuasstt. Year:2007-08

For Respondent: Shri Robin Rawan, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40

…7319/Mum/2012 4. UPS SCS (Asia) Limited [2015] 63 taxmann.com 337 5. Honest Enterprises Limited I.T.A. No. 2265/Ahd/2015 6. Leaap International (P.) Ltd. [2011] 15 taxmann.com 251 Dongnam Logistics India 7. I.T.A. No. 1839/Del/2012 8. Carborandum Co. [1977] 108 ITR 335 (SC) [1980] 125 ITR 525 (SC) 9. Toshoku Limited 13. On the issue of applicability of Section 195 and disallowance u/s 40(a)(i), the Ld. Counsel submitted that:- i. The provisions of section 195 of the Act, lays down the conditions for deduction of tax from payments made to non-residents and mandates to withhold taxes only before making any pay…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Jas Forwarding World Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal of the Assessee is allowed whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3222/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 May 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuasstt. Year:2007-08

For Respondent: Shri Robin Rawan, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40

…7319/Mum/2012 4. UPS SCS (Asia) Limited [2015] 63 taxmann.com 337 5. Honest Enterprises Limited I.T.A. No. 2265/Ahd/2015 6. Leaap International (P.) Ltd. [2011] 15 taxmann.com 251 Dongnam Logistics India 7. I.T.A. No. 1839/Del/2012 8. Carborandum Co. [1977] 108 ITR 335 (SC) [1980] 125 ITR 525 (SC) 9. Toshoku Limited 13. On the issue of applicability of Section 195 and disallowance u/s 40(a)(i), the Ld. Counsel submitted that:- i. The provisions of section 195 of the Act, lays down the conditions for deduction of tax from payments made to non-residents and mandates to withhold taxes only before making any pay…

DCIT (It) 2(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Daimler Ag, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 183/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri G. Manjunatha, Am Dcit(It)-2(1)(2), Vs. M/S. Daimler Ag Room No.1612, 16Th Floor, C/O. Srbc & Associates Llp, Chartered Accountants, 14 Th Air India Building, Nariman Point Floor, The Ruby, 29, Senapati Mumbai – 400021 Bapat Marg, Dadar(W), Mumbai - 400028 Pan/Gir No. Aabcd2354C Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 5

…which specifically state that the management papers exercisable by the MD and ED shall be subject to the supervision and control of the Board of Directors of DCIL. Further the appellant has sought to rely on the rulings in the case of Carborandum co. Vs. CIT (108 ITR 335) and Tekniskil ('Sendirian) Berhad (222 ITR 551) to argue that the deputation of the MD and ED do not constitute a PE for the appellant in India. Sales outlet/ warehouse of the appellant- The goods stored in the warehouses of DCIL. and sold at the sales outlets of DIL are those which belong to DCIL. As regards sale of parts/ CKD such sales are ma…

ACIT Non Corp. Circle 2, Coimbatore vs. Cotton Code Garments, Coimbatore

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2117/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Jan 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri A.Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan, Advocate
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 40Section 9(1)Section 9(1)(v)Section 9(1)(vi)Section 9(1)(vii)Section 9(2)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ड बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी जॉज" माथन, "याियक सद"य एवं "ी ए. मोहन अलंकामणी, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.2117/Chny/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) The Asst. Commissioner of Vs M/s. Cotton Code Garments, Income Tax, No.238, Thiruvenkatasamy Non Corporate Circle-2, Road,R.S. Puram, Coimbatore. Coimbatore – 641 002. PAN: AAEFC4114D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri Guru Bashyam, JCIT अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by…

DCIT, Circle-15(2), Kolkata vs. M/S L.G.W. Limited, North 24 Parganas

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1786/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2012-13 Dcit, Circle-15(2), V/S. M/S L.G.W. Ltd., 10, Shantipally, Em Vill. Narayanpur, P.O. Bypass, Aayakar Rajarhat, Gopalpur, 24- Bhawan, Poorva, 6Th Parganas (North), West Floor, R.No.615, Bengal-700136 Kolkata-700 107 [Pan No.Aaacl 4670 N] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri G. Mallikarjuna, Cit- अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Dr Shri A.K. Tibrerwal, Ar ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 09-07-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 05-10-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Revenue’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2012-13 Is Directed Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Kolkata’S Order Dated 29.06.2016, Passed In Case No.47/Cit(A)-5/Cir.14(1)/15-16, In Proceedings U/S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Heard Both The Parties Case File Perused. 2. The Revenue’S First Substantive Ground Challenges Correctness Of The Cit(A)’S Action Reversing Assessment Findings Disallowing The Taxpayer’S Commission Payments Made To Foreign Export Agents Amounting To ₹257,60,898/- For Non Deduction Of Tds U/S 40(A)(I) As Follows:- “1. Commission To Foreign Agents - Rs.2,57,60,898/- The Ao Has Added Sum Of Rs.2,57,60,898/- By Holding That The Said Amounts Were Paid To Foreign Agents Without Deduction Of Tds U/S.195. The Addition Has Been Made U/S

Section 1Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40Section 9Section 9(1)Section 9(1)(vi)

…he 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. [1965J 56 ITR 20 (SC) and Carborandum Co. v. CIT [1977] 108 ITR 335 (SC) which are decided on the basis of s.42 of the Indian I. T. Act , 192, which corresponds to s. 9( l)(i) of the Act). 9. In the instant case, the non-resident assesses 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…

ITO, New Delhi vs. Sh. Kulbeer Singh, New Delhi

ITA 5204/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishiito, Vs. Kulbeer Singh, Ward-26(1), H-432, Vikas Puri, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Amqps5847P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 195Section 197Section 40Section 9

…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 Carborandum 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)(2), Mumbai vs. Daimler Ag (Formerly Known As Daimler Chrysler Ag), Mumbai

ITA 5704/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Dcit (It)-2(1)(2), M/S Daimler Ag Room No. 1713, 17Th Floor, C/O Srbc & Associates Llp बिधम/ Air India Building, 14Th Floor, The Ruby, Nariman Point, 29 Senapati Bapat Marg, Vs. Mumbai-400021 Dadar (W), Mumbai-400050 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aabcd2354C (अऩीराथी /Revenue) (प्रत्मथी / Assessee) :

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Lohia &For Respondent: Shri V. Vidhyadhar, Sr. D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 5(2)Section 9(1)(i)

…which specifically state that the management papers exercisable by the MD and ED shall be subject to the supervision and control of the Board of Directors of DCIL. Further the appellant has sought to rely on the rulings in the case of Carborandum co. Vs. CIT (108 ITR 335) and Tekniskil ('Sendirian) Berhad (222 ITR 551) to argue that the deputation of the MD and ED do not constitute a PE for the appellant in India. Sales outlet/ warehouse of the appellant- The goods stored in the warehouses of DCIL. and sold at the sales outlets of DIL are those which belong to DCIL. As regards sale of parts/ CKD such sales are ma…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Smt. Sangeeta Khanna, New Delhi

ITA 1522/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri U.S. Kochar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, Senior DR
Section 195Section 40Section 40(1)(i)

…directly or indirectly to the earning of those profits or gains. It predicates an element of continuity between the business of the non-resident and the activity in India [CIT Vs. R.D. Aggarwal and Company(1965) 56 ITR 20 (SC), Carborandum & Co. Vs. CIT(1977) 2 SCC 862 and Ishikawajma-Harima Heavy Industries ltd. Vs. Director of income Tax, Mumbai(2007) 3 SCC 481]. The test which is to be applied is to examine the activities in India and whether the said activities have contributed to the business income earned by the non-resident, which has accrued, arisen or received outside India. The business connection must…

M/S. Bengal Tea & Fabrics Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle-4, Kolkata

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 1667/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2012-13

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40Section 5(2)(b)

…Thus, the Commission income has arisen in India. As mentioned by the Assessing Officer, there is no DTAA between India and Hong Kong, the country of resident of the agents. In the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Carborandum Co. V CIT (1978) (108 ITR 335 (SC) relied upon by the appellant, the facts were different. The assessee company had been paid technical fee by an Indian company for making services of foreign personnel available to Indian Company outside taxable territory. It was held that the service rendered by the assessee in that connection was wholly and solely rendered in the foreign te…

Sedco Forex International Inc. Thr. Its Constituted Attorney Mr. Navin Sarda vs. Commissioner of Income Tax Meerut

C.A. No.-004906-004906 - 2010Supreme Court30 Oct 2017

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI

Section 44B

…ide India is a basic principle of income tax law. Where payments are made to a non-resident outside India, for services rendered outside India, 3 (1986) 159 ITR 203 4 (1954) 25 ITR 27 (SC) 5 (2007) 288 ITR 408 (SC) = (2007) 3 SCC 481) 6 (1977) 108 ITR 335 (SC) 7 (1966) 60 ITR 11 (SC) 19 namely mobilization charges for drilling rigs from a foreign location to a location in India, the same is not chargeable to tax in India under Sections 5 and 9 of the Act and the same cannot be made chargeable to tax under Section 44BB of the Act. (b) A computation provision like Section 44BB cannot…

Technip Uk Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 4284/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Apr 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Smt. Beena A. Pillai[Assessment Year: 2008-09] Technip Uk Limited Vs. The D.I.T. C/O Bmr & Associates Llp International - Ii 22Nd Floor, Building No. 5 New Delhi Tower ‘A’, Dlf Cyber City, Dlf Phase Iii, Gurgaon Haryana Pan : Aacct 8268 N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Arora, Sr- DR
Section 263Section 4Section 44BSection 44D

…the India-UK DTAA, he submitted that profits attributable to PE in India shall be only profits arising from activities carried out by the PE in India. For the above proposition, he relied on the following judicial precedents: a) Carborandum Co vs CIT [1977] 108 ITR 335 (SC))- b) CIT vs. Hyundai Heavy Industries: 291 ITR 482 (SC) 31. He submitted that the ratio decidendi laid down by the Supreme Court squarely applies to the instant case since the out-country scope of the work under the Contract had been performed by the appellant from outside of India and without the intervention of the said permanent establi…

Toshiba Jsw Power Systems Private Limited, Chennai vs. ITO, Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue for assessment

ITA 3099/CHNY/2014[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Oct 2016AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

For Appellant: Shri. Arvind Sonde, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. R. Durai Pandian, IRS, JCIT

…offered to tax in India We wish to submit before your goodself that the salary paid to the expatriates were offered to tax in India by the expatriates. In this regard, reliance has been placed on the following judicial precedents: (a) Carborundum Co - [1977] 108 ITR 335 (Supreme Court) (b) Eli Lilly and Co India P Ltd - [2009] 312 ITR 225 (Supreme Court) Proposition 3: Explanation 2 to section 9(l)(vii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') clarifying the term 'fees for technical services' :- We wish to submit before your goodself that in accordance with Explanation 2 to section 9( I )(vii) of the Act, 'fees…