CESC Ltd. v. DCIT

87 ITD 653Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2003#4006 most cited

What is CESC Ltd. v. DCIT authority for?

For technical services to be taxed under a tax treaty's "make available" clause, not only must the services be technical, but they must also result in the technology being made available to the recipient.

30

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CESC Ltd v DCIT · section 9(1)(vii)(b) · make available clause · fees for technical services · Indo-UK tax treaty · Article 13(4)(c) · technology available · technical services

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 195Section 9(1)(vii)Section 143(3)Section 40(a)(ia)Section 10ASection 10AASection 115JB

Issues it is cited on

section 9(1)(vii)(b)make available clausedepreciation on softwarefees for included servicessection 10(35)copyrighted articlesection 9(1)(vii)disallowance under section 40(a)(ia)section 40a(ia)section 70section 90(2)fees for technical services

Judgments citing CESC Ltd. v. DCIT

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. COGNIZANT TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

ITA 1262/CHNY/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 May 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon'Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1193, 1194, 1205, 1206 & 1207/Chny/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Cognizant Technology Solutions Vs The Asst. Commissioner India Pvt. Ltd., Of Income Tax, No.5/535, Okkiam Thoraipakkam, Central Circle 1(1), Old Mahabalipuram Road, Chennai. Chennai - 600 096. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Pan: Aaacd 3312M (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1262, 1263, 1264, 1265 & 1266/Chny/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) The Asst. Commissioner Of Vs Cognizant Technology Income Tax, Solutions India Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle 1(1), No.5/535, Okkiam Chennai. Thoraipakkam, Old Mahabalipuram Road, Chennai - 600 096. Pan: Aaacd 3312M (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) निधारिती की ओर से/Assessee By राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit & Ms. Anitha, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11.03.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16.05.2025 - 2 -

For Respondent: Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate
Section 10ASection 14ASection 40Section 9(1)

…er respective DTAAs: O CIT vs DeBeers India Minerals Private Limited (2012) 346 ITR 467 (Kar HC) reference in this regard is made to Page No. 239 (Para No. 22) of the case law paper book • Raymond Limited vs. DCIT [86 ITD 791 (Mum. ITAT)] O CESC Ltd vs. DCIT [87 ITD 653 (Cal. ITAT)] • NQA Quality Systems Register Ltd vs. DCIT 2 SOT 249 (Del. ITAT) O Ernst & Young Private Limited In Re. 323 ITR 184 (AAR) O Sundaram Asset Management Company Ltd Vs DCIT, LTU [2019] 111 taxmann.com 11 (Chennai ITAT) reference in this regard is made to Page No. 396 (Para No. 9) of the case law paper book. - Routine repair/ maintenance…

COGNIZANT TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1),, CHENNAI

ITA 1207/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1193, 1194, 1205, 1206 & 1207/Chny/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Vs Cognizant Technology Solutions The Asst. Commissioner India Pvt. Ltd., Of Income Tax, No.5/535, Okkiam Thoraipakkam, Central Circle 1(1), Old Mahabalipuram Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 096. Pan : Aaacd 3312M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1262, 1263, 1264, 1265 & 1266/Chny/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Vs The Asst. Commissioner Of Cognizant Technology Income Tax, Solutions India Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle 1(1), No.5/535, Okkiam Chennai. Thoraipakkam, Old Mahabalipuram Road, Chennai – 600 096. Pan : Aaacd 3312M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT
Section 10ASection 14ASection 40Section 9(1)

…er respective DTAAs: o CIT vs DeBeers India Minerals Private Limited (2012) 346 ITR 467 (Kar HC) reference in this regard is made to Page No. 239 (Para No. 22) of the case law paper book o Raymond Limited vs. DCIT [86 ITD 791 (Mum. ITAT)] o CESC Ltd vs. DCIT [87 ITD 653 (Cal. ITAT)] o NQA Quality Systems Register Ltd vs. DCIT 2 SOT 249 (Del. ITAT) - 19 - ITA Nos.1193, 1194, 1205 to 1207, 1262 to 1266/CHNY/2024 o Ernst & Young Private Limited In Re. 323 ITR 184 (AAR) o Sundaram Asset Management Company Ltd Vs DCIT, LTU [2019] 111 taxmann.com 11 (Chennai ITAT) reference in this regard is made to Page No. 396 (Par…

COGNIZANT TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1),, CHENNAI

ITA 1193/CHNY/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 May 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1193, 1194, 1205, 1206 & 1207/Chny/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Vs Cognizant Technology Solutions The Asst. Commissioner India Pvt. Ltd., Of Income Tax, No.5/535, Okkiam Thoraipakkam, Central Circle 1(1), Old Mahabalipuram Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 096. Pan : Aaacd 3312M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1262, 1263, 1264, 1265 & 1266/Chny/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Vs The Asst. Commissioner Of Cognizant Technology Income Tax, Solutions India Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle 1(1), No.5/535, Okkiam Chennai. Thoraipakkam, Old Mahabalipuram Road, Chennai – 600 096. Pan : Aaacd 3312M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT
Section 10ASection 14ASection 40Section 9(1)

…er respective DTAAs: o CIT vs DeBeers India Minerals Private Limited (2012) 346 ITR 467 (Kar HC) reference in this regard is made to Page No. 239 (Para No. 22) of the case law paper book o Raymond Limited vs. DCIT [86 ITD 791 (Mum. ITAT)] o CESC Ltd vs. DCIT [87 ITD 653 (Cal. ITAT)] o NQA Quality Systems Register Ltd vs. DCIT 2 SOT 249 (Del. ITAT) - 19 - ITA Nos.1193, 1194, 1205 to 1207, 1262 to 1266/CHNY/2024 o Ernst & Young Private Limited In Re. 323 ITR 184 (AAR) o Sundaram Asset Management Company Ltd Vs DCIT, LTU [2019] 111 taxmann.com 11 (Chennai ITAT) reference in this regard is made to Page No. 396 (Par…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, WARD-1(2), BENGLAURU, BENGALURU vs. UNITEDLEX INDIA PVT. LTD. (EARLIER KNOWN AS I-RUNWAY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED), BENGALURU

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1243/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year :2015-16

For Appellant: Smt. Manasa Ananthan, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

…ledge, experience skill etc. 23. In the Raymond’s case (supra), the Tribunal also held that rendering of technical services cannot be equated with making available the technical services. In the case of CESC Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2003) 80 TTJ (Cal) (TM) 806: (2003) 87 ITD 653 (Cal)(TM) also the question regarding the scope of expression making available came up for the consideration of the Tribunal. In that case, the Tribunal was dealing with the scope of Article 13(4)(c) of the Indo-UK tax treaty which is admittedly in parimateria with Article 12(4) of the India-USA tax treaty with which we are presently concerned. Th…

MMA OFFSHORE ASIA VESSEL OPERATIONS PTE LTD. ,SINGAPORE vs. CIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-3, MUMBAI

ITA 2567/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi/Punit Lohiya, A/RsFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna, D/R
Section 142(1)Section 195Section 263

…unal in the case of Raymonds Ltd vs DCIT (86 ITD 791) Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd vs DCIT (30 SOT 374) (SB) Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs De Beers India Minerals Pvt Ltd (364 ITR 467) Kolkatta Tribunal CESC Ltd Vs. DCIT 87 ITD 653 (Kol)(TM) KPMG vs JCIT 142 ITD 323 (Mum) DCIT vs Xansa India Ltd (ITA No.2283/Del/2011 & Ors Linklaters LLP vs DCIT (ITA No. 1690/Mum/2015) Therefore, your goodself would appreciate that the services provided by MMASV are not FTS under the India-Singapore tax treaty. As the revenues earned by MMASV do not qualify as FTS, taxability of such revenue…

SNC LAVALIN INC.,DELHI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE INT. TAX 3(1)(2), DELHI

In the result, the Appeal of the assessee is allowed, the Stay Application of the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 3691/DEL/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jun 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Sh. S. K. Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 270ASection 9(1)(vii)

…Federation of Indian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (2010) 320 ITR 124 (AAR)  Ernst & Young (P) Ltd (2010) 323 ITR 184 (AAR)  R. R. Donelley India Outsource Private Ltd (2010) 241 CTR 305 (AAR)  C.E.S.C. Ltd. vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (2003) 87 ITD 653 (Kolkata)  Raymond Ltd. vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (2003) 86 ITD 791 (Mumbai)  NQA Quality Systems Ltd. vs. DCIT (2005) 92 TTJ 946 (Delhi)  Me Kinsey and Co. vs. ADIT 284 ITR (AT) 227  Cable and Wireless Networks India (P) Ltd. vs. DIT (2009) 315 ITR 72 (AAR)  Dell International Services India Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (Intl. Taxation) (20…

M/S. HERBALIFE INTERNATIONAL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION- CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 718/BANG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojarirandshri Prakash Chand Yadavassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri. Percy Pardiwala, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Harischandra Naik, CIT-DR
Section 2Section 201Section 201(1)Section 9Section 9(1)(vii)

…knowledge, experience skill etc. 73. In Raymond's case (supra), the Tribunal also held that rendering of technical services cannot be equated with making available the technical services. In the case of CESC Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2003) 80 TTJ (Cal) (TM) 806: (2003) 87 ITD 653 (Cal)(TM) also the question regarding the scope of expression making available came up for the consideration of the Tribunal. In that case, the Tribunal was dealing with the scope of Article 13(4)(c) of the Indo-UK tax treaty which is admittedly in parimateria with Article 12(4) of the India-USA tax treaty with which we are presently concerned. Th…

JCDECAUX S.A.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is party allowed

ITA 2473/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Sh. K. M. Gupta, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Om Parkash, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 270ASection 9(1)(vii)

…. DCIT 86 ITD 791 (Mumbai ITAT)  NTT Asia Pacific Holdings Pte. Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, International Taxation [2022] 141 taxmann.com 137 (Mumbai - Trib.)  Ernst & Young (P.) Ltd. [2010] 323 ITR 184 (AAR)  C.E.S.C Ltd vs. DCIT [2003] 87 ITD 653 (Kolkata ITAT)  Intertek Testing Services India (P) Ltd., In re [2008] 307 ITR 418 (AAR)  Linklaters LLP vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax [2017] 79 taxmann.com 12 (Mumbai - Trib.) 13. On the other hand, the ld. DR relied on the judgments of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Assessing Officer Circle (International Taxation-2(2)(2), New…

KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS N.V.,NETHERLANDS vs. DCIT (IT), CIRCLE - 1(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

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

ITA 1936/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 153(1)Section 9

…now a well-settled proposition that MOU to the India-USA DTAA can be used while interpreting other DTAAs which have similar "make available" clause under FTS Article. [ CIT vs. De Beers India Minerals (P.) Ltd. 21 taxmann.com 214 (Kar), C.E.S.C Ltd. vs. DCIT 87 ITD 653 (Kol - TM), Raymond Ltd. vs. DCIT 86 ITD 791 (Mum)] The MOU explains ‘make available’ as follows: “Generally speaking, technology will be considered "made available" when the person acquiring the service is enabled to apply the technology. The fact that the provision of the service may require technical input by the person providing the service do…

TYCO FIRE AND SECURITY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 270/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariit(Tp)A No.270/Bang/2021 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Acit, M/S. Tyco Fire & Security India Private Limited, Vs. D-601, Rmz Centennial, Circle - 7(1)(1), Kundalahalli Main Road, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 048. Pan : Aabct 0087 C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Rajan Vora, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Sumer Singh Meena, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 27/11.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.11.2022 O R D E R Per N V Vasudevan

For Appellant: Shri. Rajan Vora, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92Section 92(1)Section 92B(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N. V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(TP)A No.270/Bang/2021 Assessment Year : 2016-17 ACIT, M/s. Tyco Fire and Security India Private Limited, Vs. D-601, RMZ Centennial, Circle - 7(1)(1), Kundalahalli Main Road, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 048. PAN : AABCT 0087 C APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. Rajan Vora, CA Revenue by : Shri. Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru Date of hearing : 27/11.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 28.11.2022 O R D E R Per N V Vasudevan, Vice President This appeal by…

M/S IRUNWAY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 229/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Apr 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2015-16 M/S. Irunway India Private Limited, Dcit, Vs. Regus Business Center, Office Circle – 3(1)(1), No.1015, Bengaluru. 10Th Floor, Tower-B, Unitech Cyber Park, Sector 39, Gurugram, Gurgaon, Haryana – 122 003. Pan : Aabci 5613 D Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri. T. Suryanarayana, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Susan D. George, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 37Section 40

…ledge, experience skill etc. 23. In the Raymond’s case (supra), the Tribunal also held that rendering of technical services cannot be equated with making available the technical services. In the case of CESC Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2003) 80 TTJ (Cal) (TM) 806: (2003) 87 ITD 653 (Cal)(TM) also the question regarding the scope of expression making available came up for the consideration of the Tribunal. In that case, the Tribunal was dealing with the scope of Article 13(4)(c) of the Indo-UK tax treaty which is admittedly in pari materia with Article 12(4) of the India-USA tax treaty with which we are presently concerned. T…

NETCRACKER TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS LLC,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR (IT) 3(3)(1), MUMBAI

The appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 783/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.783/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Netcracker Technology Solutions Llc Dcit- Circle-3(3)(1) (Formerly Known As Convergys Information International Taxation Management Group Inc.) Mumbai. बनाम/ C/O. Pricewater House Coopers Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Pwc House, Plot 18/A Guru Nanak Road, (Station Road) Bandra (W), Mumbai-400 050 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaccc-8990-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Ms. Hirali Desai-Ld.Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Samuel Darse-Ld. Cit-Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 01/10/2019 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 14/10/2019 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Ms. Hirali Desai-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Samuel Darse-Ld. CIT-DR
Section 144C(5)Section 2Section 234BSection 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 9

…to tax under article 13 only when it makes available the technology in the sense that recipient of service is enabled to perform the same service without recourse to the service provider. As held by this Tribunal, in the case of C.E.S.C. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT[2003] 87 ITD 653 (Kol.) (TM), "....in order to be covered by the provisions of Art. 13(4)(c) of the India-UK DTAA, not only the services should be of technical in nature but such as to result in making the technology available to the person receiving the technical services. We also agree that merely because the provision of the service may require technical input…

NETCRACKER TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS INC.,MUMBAI vs. ASST DIT CIR (IT)1(2),

In the result appeals of all the assessment years are allowed

ITA 1701/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna with Miss. Hirali Desai (ARs)For Respondent: Shri Samuel Darse CIT-DR and Sh. Manish K. Singh ( Sr DR)
Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 271Section 9

…to tax under article 13 only when it makes available the technology in the sense that recipient of service is enabled to perform the same service without recourse to the service provider. As held by this Tribunal, in the case of C.E.S.C. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT[2003] 87 ITD 653 (Kol.) (TM), "....in order to be covered by the provisions of Art. 13(4)(c) of the India-UK DTAA, not only the services should NetCracker Technology Solutions Inc. be of technical in nature but such as to result in making the technology available to the person receiving the technical services. We also agree that merely because the provision of th…

H.J. HEINZ COMPANY, USA,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1991/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleh. J. Heinz Company, Usa Vs Adit 7Th Floor, D-Shivsagar Estate, Circle-1(2) Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli International Taxation Mumabi New Delhi Aacch2144P (Respondent) (Appellant) H. J. Heinz Company, Usa Vs Acit 7Th Floor, D-Shivsagar Estate, Circle-2(1)(1), Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli International Taxation, Mumabi Room No. 410, 4Th Floor, E- Aacch2144P Z Block, Pratyaksh Kar (Appellant) Bhawan New Delhi (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 234BSection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 9(1)(vi)Section 9(1)(vii)

…B (2015) 61 taxmann.com 31 xiii) Measurement Technology Ltd. 376 ITR 340 – AAR xiv) Sandvik Australia Pty. Ltd. (2013) 31 taxmann.com 256 xv) Endemol India Private Limited 361 ITR 340 xvi) Invensys Systems Inc (2009) 183 Taxman 81 – AAR xvii) KPMG Ltd. (2013) 142 ITD 323 xviii) Renaissance Services BV (2018) 94 taxmann.com 465 xix) Veeda Clinic Research (P) Ltd. (2013) 144 ITD 297 xx) Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. (2018) 97 taxmann.com 350 Further, the case laws mentioned hereunder are specifically on the proposition that managerial services are not covered under FIS article in India-USA DTAA: i) Raymond L…

H.J. HEINZ COMPANY, USA,MUMBAI vs. ADIT, NEW DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6252/DEL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleh. J. Heinz Company, Usa Vs Adit 7Th Floor, D-Shivsagar Estate, Circle-1(2) Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli International Taxation Mumabi New Delhi Aacch2144P (Respondent) (Appellant) H. J. Heinz Company, Usa Vs Acit 7Th Floor, D-Shivsagar Estate, Circle-2(1)(1), Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli International Taxation, Mumabi Room No. 410, 4Th Floor, E- Aacch2144P Z Block, Pratyaksh Kar (Appellant) Bhawan New Delhi (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 234BSection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 9(1)(vi)Section 9(1)(vii)

…B (2015) 61 taxmann.com 31 xiii) Measurement Technology Ltd. 376 ITR 340 – AAR xiv) Sandvik Australia Pty. Ltd. (2013) 31 taxmann.com 256 xv) Endemol India Private Limited 361 ITR 340 xvi) Invensys Systems Inc (2009) 183 Taxman 81 – AAR xvii) KPMG Ltd. (2013) 142 ITD 323 xviii) Renaissance Services BV (2018) 94 taxmann.com 465 xix) Veeda Clinic Research (P) Ltd. (2013) 144 ITD 297 xx) Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. (2018) 97 taxmann.com 350 Further, the case laws mentioned hereunder are specifically on the proposition that managerial services are not covered under FIS article in India-USA DTAA: i) Raymond L…

M/S REDCORE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-5(1)(4), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 226/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Apr 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R Baskaranassessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri M.P Lohia, C.AFor Respondent: Dr. P.V Pradeep Kumar, Addl. CIT (DR) by
Section 195Section 234DSection 271Section 40

…erience skill etc. Page 11 of 22 15. In Raymond’s case (supra), the Tribunal also held that rendering of technical services cannot be equated with making available the technical services. In the case of CESC Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2003) 80 TTJ (Cal) (TM) 806: (2003) 87 ITD 653 (Cal)(TM) also the question regarding the scope of expression making available came up for the consideration of the Tribunal. In that case, the Tribunal was dealing with the scope of Article 13(4)(c) of the Indo-UK tax treaty which is admittedly in pari materia with Article 12(4) of the India-USA tax treaty. The majority view was that in order to…

M/S OUTOTEC INDIA PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 4511/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Saini & Sh. N. S. Sainiita No. 4511/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Outotec India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dy. Commissioner Of Income 507, 5Th Floor, Copia Corporate Tax, Circle-13(1), Suites, 9, Jasola Commercial New Delhi-110002 Complex, Jasola, New Delhi-110025, Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaco9433A Assessee By : Sh. G. C. Srivastava, Adv. & Sh. Suvinay Kumar Dash, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Surender Pal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 12.03.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.03.2019 Order Per N. S. Saini:

For Appellant: Sh. G. C. Srivastava, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Surender Pal, Sr. DR
Section 40

…ithout recourse to the performer of services, in future". In Raymond's case (supra), the Tribunal also held that rendering of technical services cannot be equated with making available the technical services. Later, in the case of CESC Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT (2003) 87 ITD 653 (Cal.)(TM) also, the question regarding the scope of expression 'making available' came up for the consideration. In that case also the view was that "not only the services should be of technical in nature but such as to result in making the technology available to the person receiving the technical services. We also agree that merely because the…

KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS N.V.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT(IT),CIRCLE-1(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee, in all the assessment years, are allowed in part

ITA 87/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Feb 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravii.T.A. No. 112/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Koninklijke Philips N.V……………………………...............................………...…………………….…Assessee [Pan : Aacck 0806 B] Dcit(It) -1(2), Kolkata………............................................................…....….…………..………...Revenue & I.T.A. No. 87/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Koninklijke Philips N.V……………………………........................................………...…………………….…Assessee [Pan : Aacck 0806 B] Acit(It), Circle-1(2), Kolkata………............................................................…....….…………..………...Revenue & I.T.A. No.2474/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Koninklijke Philips N.V……………………………........................................………...…………………….…Assessee [Pan : Aacck 0806 B] Acit(It), Circle-1(2), Kolkata………............................................................…....….…………..………...Revenue Appearances By: Shri P.J. Pardiwala, Sr. Advocate & Navneet Misra, Adovacate, Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri P. K. Srihari, Cit-Dr, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue.

Section 143(3)

…now a well- settled proposition that MOU to the India-USA DTAA can be used while interpreting other DTAAs which have similar "make available" clause under FTS Article. [ CIT vs. De Beers India Minerals (P.) Ltd. 21 taxmann.com 214 (Kar), C.E.S.C Ltd. vs. DCIT 87 ITD 653 (Kol - TM), Raymond Ltd. vs. DCIT 86 ITD 791 (Mum)] The MOU explains ‘make available’ as follows: “Generally speaking, technology will be considered "made available" when the person acquiring the service is enabled to apply the technology. The fact that the provision of the service may require technical input by the person providing the service…

KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS N.V.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, (IT)-1(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee, in all the assessment years, are allowed in part

ITA 112/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Feb 2019AY 2011-2012

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravii.T.A. No. 112/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Koninklijke Philips N.V……………………………...............................………...…………………….…Assessee [Pan : Aacck 0806 B] Dcit(It) -1(2), Kolkata………............................................................…....….…………..………...Revenue & I.T.A. No. 87/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Koninklijke Philips N.V……………………………........................................………...…………………….…Assessee [Pan : Aacck 0806 B] Acit(It), Circle-1(2), Kolkata………............................................................…....….…………..………...Revenue & I.T.A. No.2474/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Koninklijke Philips N.V……………………………........................................………...…………………….…Assessee [Pan : Aacck 0806 B] Acit(It), Circle-1(2), Kolkata………............................................................…....….…………..………...Revenue Appearances By: Shri P.J. Pardiwala, Sr. Advocate & Navneet Misra, Adovacate, Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri P. K. Srihari, Cit-Dr, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue.

Section 143(3)

…now a well- settled proposition that MOU to the India-USA DTAA can be used while interpreting other DTAAs which have similar "make available" clause under FTS Article. [ CIT vs. De Beers India Minerals (P.) Ltd. 21 taxmann.com 214 (Kar), C.E.S.C Ltd. vs. DCIT 87 ITD 653 (Kol - TM), Raymond Ltd. vs. DCIT 86 ITD 791 (Mum)] The MOU explains ‘make available’ as follows: “Generally speaking, technology will be considered "made available" when the person acquiring the service is enabled to apply the technology. The fact that the provision of the service may require technical input by the person providing the service…

KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS N.V.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT(IT), CIRCLE - 1(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee, in all the assessment years, are allowed in part

ITA 2474/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Feb 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravii.T.A. No. 112/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Koninklijke Philips N.V……………………………...............................………...…………………….…Assessee [Pan : Aacck 0806 B] Dcit(It) -1(2), Kolkata………............................................................…....….…………..………...Revenue & I.T.A. No. 87/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Koninklijke Philips N.V……………………………........................................………...…………………….…Assessee [Pan : Aacck 0806 B] Acit(It), Circle-1(2), Kolkata………............................................................…....….…………..………...Revenue & I.T.A. No.2474/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Koninklijke Philips N.V……………………………........................................………...…………………….…Assessee [Pan : Aacck 0806 B] Acit(It), Circle-1(2), Kolkata………............................................................…....….…………..………...Revenue Appearances By: Shri P.J. Pardiwala, Sr. Advocate & Navneet Misra, Adovacate, Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri P. K. Srihari, Cit-Dr, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue.

Section 143(3)

…now a well- settled proposition that MOU to the India-USA DTAA can be used while interpreting other DTAAs which have similar "make available" clause under FTS Article. [ CIT vs. De Beers India Minerals (P.) Ltd. 21 taxmann.com 214 (Kar), C.E.S.C Ltd. vs. DCIT 87 ITD 653 (Kol - TM), Raymond Ltd. vs. DCIT 86 ITD 791 (Mum)] The MOU explains ‘make available’ as follows: “Generally speaking, technology will be considered "made available" when the person acquiring the service is enabled to apply the technology. The fact that the provision of the service may require technical input by the person providing the service…

Showing 1–20 of 30 · Page 1 of 2