CIT v. Bharti Cellular Ltd.

330 ITR 239Supreme Court of India2011#679 most cited

What is CIT v. Bharti Cellular Ltd. authority for?

The Supreme Court holds that for a service to qualify as 'fees for technical services' under Section 9(1)(vii) of the Income-tax Act or Article 12 of a DTAA, direct human involvement or intervention in rendering the service is essential. This principle applies to telecommunication services like interconnect charges and roaming charges, and also to services related to software use.

147

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Bharti Cellular Ltd. · 330 ITR 239 · Section 9(1)(vii) · Section 194J · fees for technical services · FTS · human intervention · human involvement · interconnect charges · roaming charges · DTAA Article 12 · Section 40(a)(ia)

Sections most often in play

Section 9(1)(vii)Section 143(3)Section 144C(3)Section 194JSection 40(a)(ia)Section 194HSection 201(1A)Section 194I

Issues it is cited on

section 206asection 35abbsection 206aause of equipmentsection 35ddsection 194hsection 194jsection 9(1)(vi)section 40a(ia)section 195(2)section 9(1)(vii)fees for technical services

Judgments citing CIT v. Bharti Cellular Ltd.

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle-421, Mumbai vs. Sita Information Networking Computing Usa Inc., Mumbai

ITA 6439/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna (CIT-DR) /
Section 143(3)Section 9(1)(vii)

…Services by holding that the said services cannot be taxed under section 9(1)(vii) for the reason that these services do not involve human element, by placing reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharti Cellular Limited [2010] 330 ITR 239 and Kotak Securities Limited [2016] 383 ITR 1. The CIT(A) held the Passenger Services to be not taxable under Article 12 of the DTAA between India and USA also stating that no technology is made available to recipient of the services nor is there transfer of any technical knowledge, experience, skill, know-how or processes, nor does it consist of…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle-421, Mumbai vs. Sita Information Networking Computing Usa Inc., Usa

ITA 6436/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna (CIT-DR) /
Section 143(3)Section 9(1)(vii)

…Services by holding that the said services cannot be taxed under section 9(1)(vii) for the reason that these services do not involve human element, by placing reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharti Cellular Limited [2010] 330 ITR 239 and Kotak Securities Limited [2016] 383 ITR 1. The CIT(A) held the Passenger Services to be not taxable under Article 12 of the DTAA between India and USA also stating that no technology is made available to recipient of the services nor is there transfer of any technical knowledge, experience, skill, know-how or processes, nor does it consist of…

Dreams Dwellers LLP(As Legal Representative of Megacorp Developers Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT -24(1) (Earlier ACIT Cir 10(1)(1), Mumbai)

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4937/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh () Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dreams Dwellers Llp (As Legal Acit-24(1) (Earlier Acit Cir 10(1)(1) Representative Of Megacorp Mumbai), Vs. Developers Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai) Room No. 604, 6Th Floor, Piramal 702, Natraj, Mv Road, Junction W E Chambers Parel, Highway, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400012. Mumbai-400069. Pan No. Aafcm 0366 B Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Ajay SinghFor Respondent: Ms. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 56(2)(viib)

…CIT Vs Vibhu Talwar ( 11 taxmann.com 419) CIT Vs Vibhu Talwar ( 11 taxmann.com 419) CIT Vs Vibhu Talwar ( 11 taxmann.com 419) and Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs Bharti Cellular Ltd CIT Vs Bharti Cellular Ltd Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of (330 ITR 239) held that the Revenue held that the Revenue authorities should take expert should take expert opinion from independent expert independent expert while deciding matter of valuation while deciding matter of valuation. The Amaritsar Bench of the ITAT in the case of Him Agri Fresh (P) Him Agri Fresh (P) The Amaritsar Bench of the ITAT in the case of…

Tata Teleservices Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-76(1), New Delhi

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1057/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. M. Balaganesh & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Tata Vs. Assistant Commissioner Teleserviceslimited New Of Income Tax Circle 76(1) Delhi Districtcentral Laxmi Taxation Department Nagar New Delhi 110092 M/S Tata Teleservices Limited 2A, Old Ishwar Nahar Mathura Road New Delhi 110065 (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 191Section 194Section 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

…ex Court for canvassing the contention that the roaming charges paid by the assessee to other services provider can be said as ‘technical services’; one was the decision of the Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Bharti Cellular Ltd. [2010] 193 Taxman 97/[2011] 330 ITR 239 (SC); and the another was the decision of the Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Kotak Securities Ltd. [2016] 67 taxman.com 356/239 Taxman 139/383 ITR 1 (SC) and it was submitted if the observations made by the Apex Court in the above referred decision are considered, the decision of the Tribunal would be unsustainable and consequently, the questio…

Vodafone Essar Mobile Services Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 5146/DEL/2011[2011-12 (F.Y. 2010-11)]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2024

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

For Appellant: RespondentFor Respondent: Shri Ketan Ved/ Ninad Patade
Section 194Section 194HSection 194JSection 9(1)(vii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “J” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.5142/D/2011 Assessment Year: 2003-04 ITA No.5146/D/2011 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Vodafone Mobile Assistant Commissioner Services Limited of Income Tax Circle c-45, 51(1) Okhla Indusrial Area, Vs. Aayakar Bhawan, Phase II, New Delhi- 110020 Distt. Centre, PAN: AAACS4457Q Laxmi Nagar, Appellant : Respondent New Delhi. ITA No.5143/D/2011 Assessment Year: 2008-09 ITA No.5144/D/2011 Assessment Year: 2009-10 ITA No.5145/D/2011 Assessment Year: 2010-11…

Vodafone Essar Mobile Services Ltd., New Delhi vs. JCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 5145/DEL/2011[2010-11 (F.Y. 2009-10)]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2024
For Appellant: RespondentFor Respondent: Ms. Vatsala Jha (PCIT)
Section 194Section 194HSection 194JSection 9(1)(vii)

…Court for canvassing the contention that the roaming charges paid by the assessee to the other service provider can be said as 'technical services; one was the decision. of the Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Bharti Cellular Ltd. [2010] 193 Taxman 97/120111 330 ITR 239 (SC); and the another was the decision of the Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Kotak Securities Ltd. [2016] 67 taxmann.com 356/239 Тахтап 139/383 ITR (SC) and it was submitted that if the observations made by the Apex Court in the above referred decisions are considered, the decision of the Tribunal would be unsustainable and consequently, the qu…

Vodafone Essar Mobile Services Ltd., New Delhi vs. JCIT, New Delhi

ITA 5144/DEL/2011[2009-10 (F.Y. 2008-09)]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2024

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

Section 194Section 194HSection 194JSection 9(1)(vii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “J” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.5142/D/2011 Assessment Year: 2003-04 ITA No.5146/D/2011 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Vodafone Services Limited c-45, Okhla Indusrial Area, Vs. Phase II, New Delhi- 110020 PAN: AAACS4457Q Mobile Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 51(1) Aayakar Bhawan, Distt. Centre, Laxmi Nagar, New Delhi. Respondent Appellant ITA No.5143/D/2011 Assessment Year: 2008-09 ITA No.5144/D/2011 Assessment Year: 2009-10 ITA No.5145/D/2011 Assessment Year: 2010-11 V…

Vodafone Essar Mobile Services Ltd., New Delhi vs. JCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 5143/DEL/2011[2008-09 (F.Y.-2007-08)]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2024

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Rahul Chaudharyassessment Year: 2003-04 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Vodafone Mobile Assistant Commissioner Services Limited Of Income Tax Circle C-45, 51(1) Okhla Indusrial Area, Vs. Aayakar Bhawan, Phase Ii, Distt. Centre, New Delhi- 110020 Laxmi Nagar, Pan: Aaacs4457Q New Delhi. Appellant : Respondent Assessment Year: 2008-09 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Vodafone Mobile Joint Commissioner Of Services Limited Income Tax Circle 51(1) C-45, Aayakar Bhawan, Okhla Indusrial Area, Vs. Distt. Centre, Phase Ii, Laxmi Nagar, New Delhi- 110020 New Delhi. Pan: Aaacs4457Q Appellant : Respondent

For Appellant: RespondentFor Respondent: Ms. Vatsala Jha (PCIT)
Section 194Section 194HSection 194JSection 9(1)(vii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “J” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2003-04 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Vodafone Mobile Assistant Commissioner Services Limited of Income Tax Circle c-45, 51(1) Okhla Indusrial Area, Vs. Aayakar Bhawan, Phase II, Distt. Centre, New Delhi- 110020 Laxmi Nagar, PAN: AAACS4457Q New Delhi. Appellant : Respondent Assessment Year: 2008-09 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Vodafone Mobile Joint Commissioner of Services Limited Income Tax Circle 51(1) c-45, Aayakar Bhawan…

Vodafone Essar Mobile Services Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 5142/DEL/2011[2003-04 (F.Y. 2002-03)]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2024

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

Section 194Section 194HSection 194JSection 9(1)(vii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “J” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.5142/D/2011 Assessment Year: 2003-04 ITA No.5146/D/2011 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Vodafone Mobile Services Limited Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 51(1) c-45, Okhla Indusrial Area, Vs. Phase II, New Delhi- 110020 PAN: AAACS4457Q Appellant Aayakar Bhawan, Distt. Centre, Laxmi Nagar, New Delhi. Respondent ITA No.5143/D/2011 Assessment Year: 2008-09 ITA No.5144/D/2011 Assessment Year: 2009-10 ITA No.5145/D/2011 Assessment Year: 2010-11 V…

M/S. Idea Cellular Limited, Indore vs. The DCIT (TDS), Indore

Appeals are allowed

ITA 111/IND/2015[2013-14 (Quarter 4)]Status: DisposedITAT Indore01 Aug 2024

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 194Section 194HSection 194JSection 201(1)

…Court for canvassing the contention that the roaming charges paid by the assessee to the other service provider can be said as 'technical services'; one was the decision of the Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Bharti Cellular Ltd. [2010] 193 Taxman 97/[2011] 330 ITR 239 (SC); and the another was the decision of the Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Kotak Securities Ltd. [2016] 67 taxmann.com 356/239 Taxman 139/383 ITR 1 (SC) and it was submitted that if the observations made by the Apex Court in the above referred decisions are considered, the decision of the Tribunal would be unsustainable and consequently, the…

M/S. Idea Cellular Limited, Indore vs. The DCIT (TDS), Indore

Appeals are allowed

ITA 110/IND/2015[2013-14 (for first three quarter)]Status: DisposedITAT Indore01 Aug 2024

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 194Section 194HSection 194JSection 201(1)

…Court for canvassing the contention that the roaming charges paid by the assessee to the other service provider can be said as 'technical services'; one was the decision of the Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Bharti Cellular Ltd. [2010] 193 Taxman 97/[2011] 330 ITR 239 (SC); and the another was the decision of the Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Kotak Securities Ltd. [2016] 67 taxmann.com 356/239 Taxman 139/383 ITR 1 (SC) and it was submitted that if the observations made by the Apex Court in the above referred decisions are considered, the decision of the Tribunal would be unsustainable and consequently, the…

M/S. Idea Cellular Limited, Indore vs. The DCIT (TDS), Indore

Appeals are allowed

ITA 109/IND/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore01 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 194Section 194HSection 194JSection 201(1)

…Court for canvassing the contention that the roaming charges paid by the assessee to the other service provider can be said as 'technical services'; one was the decision of the Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Bharti Cellular Ltd. [2010] 193 Taxman 97/[2011] 330 ITR 239 (SC); and the another was the decision of the Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Kotak Securities Ltd. [2016] 67 taxmann.com 356/239 Taxman 139/383 ITR 1 (SC) and it was submitted that if the observations made by the Apex Court in the above referred decisions are considered, the decision of the Tribunal would be unsustainable and consequently, the…

The Commissioner of Income Tax - International Taxation -3 vs. Telstra Singapore Pte Ltd

ITA/334/2022HC Delhi24 Jul 2024

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 9

…s patent, invention, model, design, formula, trade mark, etc. Thus, the word "process" must also refer to a specie of intellectual property applying the rule of ejusdem generis or noscitur a sociis as held in the case of CIT v. Bharti Cellular Ltd. [2011] 330 ITR 239 (SC). The expression "similar property" used at the end of the list further fortifies the stand that the terms "patent, invention, model, design, secret formula or process or trade mark" are to be understood as belonging to the same class of properties, viz., intellectual property. "'Intellectual property' as understood in common parlance…

The Commissioner of Income Tax - International Taxation -3 vs. Telstra Singapore Pte Ltd

ITA/206/2023HC Delhi24 Jul 2024

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 9

…s patent, invention, model, design, formula, trade mark, etc. Thus, the word "process" must also refer to a specie of intellectual property applying the rule of ejusdem generis or noscitur a sociis as held in the case of CIT v. Bharti Cellular Ltd. [2011] 330 ITR 239 (SC). The expression "similar property" used at the end of the list further fortifies the stand that the terms "patent, invention, model, design, secret formula or process or trade mark" are to be understood as belonging to the same class of properties, viz., intellectual property. "'Intellectual property' as understood in common parlance…

The Commissioner of Income Tax - International Taxation -3 vs. Telstra Singapore Pte Ltd

ITA/61/2023HC Delhi24 Jul 2024

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 9

…s patent, invention, model, design, formula, trade mark, etc. Thus, the word "process" must also refer to a specie of intellectual property applying the rule of ejusdem generis or noscitur a sociis as held in the case of CIT v. Bharti Cellular Ltd. [2011] 330 ITR 239 (SC). The expression "similar property" used at the end of the list further fortifies the stand that the terms "patent, invention, model, design, secret formula or process or trade mark" are to be understood as belonging to the same class of properties, viz., intellectual property. "'Intellectual property' as understood in common parlance…

The Commissioner of Income Tax - International Taxation -3 vs. Telstra Singapore Pte Ltd

ITA/55/2023HC Delhi24 Jul 2024

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 9

…s patent, invention, model, design, formula, trade mark, etc. Thus, the word "process" must also refer to a specie of intellectual property applying the rule of ejusdem generis or noscitur a sociis as held in the case of CIT v. Bharti Cellular Ltd. [2011] 330 ITR 239 (SC). The expression "similar property" used at the end of the list further fortifies the stand that the terms "patent, invention, model, design, secret formula or process or trade mark" are to be understood as belonging to the same class of properties, viz., intellectual property. "'Intellectual property' as understood in common parlance…

Kddi Corporation, Japan vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation), Circle 2(1), Bangalore

ITA 811/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubeyit(It)A No.811/Bang/2024 & Sp No.22/Bang/2024

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 147Section 201Section 9Section 9(1)(vi)

…IT(IT)A No.811/Bang/2024 & SP No.22/Bang/2024 KDDI Corporation, Japan IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "C" BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(IT)A No.811/Bang/2024 & SP No.22/Bang/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 KDDI Corporation 2-3-2, NishiShinjuku Shinjuku-Ku Tokyo Japan 1638003 PAN NO : AAICK5961D APPELLANT Appellant by Respondent by Date of Hearing Date of Pronouncement DCIT (IT) Vs. Circle-2(1) Bangalore RESPONDENT Sri Ajit Prasad, Sr. A.R. Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R. 05.06.2024 05.06.2024 ORDER PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: Thi…

Globe Teleservices Limited, Hong Kong vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax (International Taxation), Circle-2(1), Bangalore

ITA 349/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuit(It)A Nos. 348 & 349/Bang/2024

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani, CA &For Respondent: Shri A. Sreenivasa Rao, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 191Section 201Section 9(1)(vi)

…or infringing the right." 8.2.5 Thus the word "process" thus must also refer to specie of intellectual property, applying the rule of, ejusdem generis or noscitur a sociis, as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. Bharti Cellular reported in (2011) 330 ITR 239. 8.2.6 We refer to the decision of Hon'ble Madras High Court in case of CIT vs. Neyveli Lignite Corpn. Ltd. reported in (2000) 243 ITR 459 wherein Hon'ble High Court observed as under: "10.The term (royalty' normally connotes the payment made to a person who has exclusive right over a thing for allowing another to make use of that thing which may…

Globe Teleservices Limited, Hong Kong vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax (International Taxation), Circle-2(1), Bangalore

ITA 348/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Apr 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuit(It)A Nos. 348 & 349/Bang/2024

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani, CA &For Respondent: Shri A. Sreenivasa Rao, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 191Section 201Section 9(1)(vi)

…or infringing the right." 8.2.5 Thus the word "process" thus must also refer to specie of intellectual property, applying the rule of, ejusdem generis or noscitur a sociis, as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. Bharti Cellular reported in (2011) 330 ITR 239. 8.2.6 We refer to the decision of Hon'ble Madras High Court in case of CIT vs. Neyveli Lignite Corpn. Ltd. reported in (2000) 243 ITR 459 wherein Hon'ble High Court observed as under: "10.The term (royalty' normally connotes the payment made to a person who has exclusive right over a thing for allowing another to make use of that thing which may…

Idea Cellular Limited, Indore vs. DCIT TDS, Indore

ITA 265/IND/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Apr 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S Vodafone Idea Ltd. Cit (Tds), बनाम/ (Formerly M/S Idea Bhopal Vs. Cellular Ltd.), 139-140, Electronics Complex, Pardeshipura, Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) M/S Vodafone Idea Ltd. Dcit/Jcit (Tds), बनाम/ (Formerly M/S Idea Indore Vs. Cellular Ltd.), 139-140, Electronics Complex, Pardeshipura, Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent)

Section 194HSection 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 250Section 254(2)Section 263

…Court for canvassing the contention that the roaming charges paid by the assessee to the other service provider can be said as 'technical services'; one was the decision of the Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Bharti Cellular Ltd. [2010] 193 Taxman 97/[2011] 330 ITR 239 (SC); and the another was the decision of the Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Kotak Securities Ltd. [2016] 67 taxmann.com 356/239 Taxman 139/383 ITR 1 (SC) and it was submitted that if the observations made by the Apex Court in the above referred decisions are considered, the decision of the Tribunal would be unsustainable and consequently, the…