CIT v. Bharti Cellular Ltd.

DCIT 8 (3)(1), Mumbai vs. Tata Teleservices (Mah.) Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for assessment years 2012-2013

…face, the interconnect charges cannot be regarded as Fee for Technical Services (FTS) and hence would not fall in the ambit of section 194J of the Act. We find that on further appeal by the revenue to the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in CIT vs Bharti Cellular Ltd in 330 ITR 239 (SC) , the Hon‟ble Apex Court had stated that “right from 1979 various judgments of the High Courts and Tribunal have taken the view that the words “technical services” have got to be read in the narrower sense by applying the rule of nosci tur a sociis, particularly , because the words “technical services” in section 9(1)(v ii) r.w. Explanation…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 8(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Shyam Ahuja Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed, in the terms indicated above

…utted as above and there is therefore no need to defer from the valuation report which is based on specific sale instances of the relevant period in the vicinity of the plot of the assessee. The Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Bharti Cellular Ltd. [2011] 330 ITR 239 (SC) has already held that the role of technical experts is very important in matters of taxation. Therefore the ground of appeal no. 2 of the assessee is dismissed. 6. The assessee is not satisfied that the stands were taken by the learned CIT(A) and as in further appeal before us. 7. We have heard the rival contentions, perused the material i…

DCIT - 9(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Best Paper Mills Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Itas No. 4984/Mum/2017 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2014-15) The Dy. Commissioner Of M/S. Best Paper Mills Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax-9(2)(1), 2, Ground Floor, Ram Niwas, Mumbai-400020 Vs. Paranjpe ‘B’ Scheme, Road No.3, Ville Parle (E), Andheri, Mumbai-57 .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) स्थायी लेखा िं./Pan No. Aaacb2782M प्रत्याक्षेप सM./ Co No. 351/Mum/2018 (Arising In Ita No. 4984/Mum/2017 For Ay 2014-15) M/S. Best Paper Mills Pvt. Ltd. The Dy. Commissioner Of 2, Ground Floor, Ram Niwas, Income Tax-9(2)(1), Paranjpe ‘B’ Scheme, Vs. Mumbai-400020 Road No.3, Ville Parle (E), Andheri, Mumbai-57 .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) अपीलाथी की ओर े / Appellant By : Shri S. Abi Rama Karthikeyan, Dr प्रत्यथी की ओर े / Respondent By : Shri B.V. Jhaveri, Ar ुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 09.07.2019 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 19.07.2019

…/2011 which require Ld. AO to seek technical opinion of experts and bring on record technical evidences in cases involving complex issue of technical nature. This requirement has also been highlighted by Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT V/s. Bharti Cellular Ltd. [330 ITR 239] wherein the Hon’ble Court emphasized on the need to rely upon the opinion from technical experts in cases involving complex technical matters so that Appellate forums are able to decide the legal issues based on the factual foundation of a case. 9.9 It is settled law that statements recorded during survey proceedings would have no evidentiary v…

DCIT 9(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Best Paper Mills P. Ltd, Mumbai

Appeals stand dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

…25/61/2011-IT(A-11)] dated 30/03/2011 which mandate Ld. AO to seek technical opinion in cases involving complex issue of technical nature. This requirement was also highlighted in the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in CIT V/s Bharti Cellular Ltd. [330 ITR 239]. However, Ld. AO merely preferred to rely on the general statements made by the employees during the course of survey. The said statements were not supported by any documentary evidences. 7.5 Regarding confession by MD, it was observed at para-10 that survey team had requested the MD to disclose yield at the rate of 85% for various assessment ye…

Best Paper Mills P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 9(2)(1), Mumbai

Appeals stand dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

…25/61/2011-IT(A-11)] dated 30/03/2011 which mandate Ld. AO to seek technical opinion in cases involving complex issue of technical nature. This requirement was also highlighted in the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in CIT V/s Bharti Cellular Ltd. [330 ITR 239]. However, Ld. AO merely preferred to rely on the general statements made by the employees during the course of survey. The said statements were not supported by any documentary evidences. 7.5 Regarding confession by MD, it was observed at para-10 that survey team had requested the MD to disclose yield at the rate of 85% for various assessment ye…

Elsevier Information Systems Gmbh, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 2(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

…ndia. In support of such contention, learned Sr. Counsel for the assessee relied upon the following decisions:– i) DIT v/s A.P. Moller Maersk A.S., 392 ITR 186 (SC); ii) CIT v/s Kotak Securities Ltd., 383 ITR 001 (SC); and iii) CIT v/s Bharati Cellular Ltd., 330 ITR 239 (SC). 9. The learned Departmental Representative strongly relying upon the observations of the Assessing Officer and the DRP submitted that the data provided by the assessee through the database are customized data catering to the specific need of the customer. Therefore, the subscription fee received by the assessee is in the nature of royalty/…

DCIT 8(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Tata Teleservices (Mah) Ltd, Navi Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Pawan Singhdcit-8(3)(1) M/S Tata Teleservices (Mah) Room No. 615, 6Th Floor, Ltd., D-26, Ttc Indl Area Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Midc, Sanpada, P.O. Turbhe, Mumbai-20. Navi Mumbai-400703. Vs. Pan: Aaach1458C Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri R. Manjunatha Swamy (Cit-Dr) Respondent By : Shri Hiten Chande (Ar) Date Of Hearing : 21.01.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.01.2019 Order Under Section 254(1)Of Income Tax Act

…face, the interconnect charges cannot be regarded as Fee for Technical Services (FTS) and hence would not fall in the ambit of section 194J of the Act. We find that on further appeal by the revenue to the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in CIT vs Bharti Cellular Ltd in 330 ITR 239 (SC), the Hon‟ble Apex Court had stated that "right from 1979 various judgments of the High Courts and Tribunal have taken the view that the words "technical services" have got to be read in the narrower sense by applying the rule of nosci tur a sociis, particularly , because the words "technical services" in section 9(1)(v ii) r.w. Explanation 2…

Loop Mobile (I) Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT (TDS) 2(1), Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm M/S. Loop Mobile (India) Pvt. Vs. Acit (Tds)2(1) Ltd., K.G. Mittal Building, Official Liquidator – Bombay Charni Road, High Court Mumbai 5Th Floor, Bank Of India Building, Opp. M.G. Road Fort, Mumbai – 400 020 Pan/Gir No.Aaacb9986H (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM M/s. Loop Mobile (India) Pvt. Vs. ACIT (TDS)2(1) Ltd., K.G. Mittal Building, Official Liquidator – Bombay Charni Road, High Court Mumbai 5th Floor, Bank of India Building, Opp. M.G. Road Fort, Mumbai – 400 020 PAN/GIR No.AAACB9986H (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by None Revenue by Shri Abi Rama Kartikeyan Date of Hearing 05/10/2018 Date of Pronouncement 10/10/2018 आदेश / O R D E R PER R.C.SHARMA (A.M): This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A)- 14, Mumbai dated 30/04/201…

The Dy DIT (I.T) 2(1) vs. M/S. Reuters Transactions Services Ltd

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm

…ld to be in the nature of FTS. In support of his aforesaid contention, the ld. A.R relied on the judgments of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT-4, Mumbai Vs. Kotak Securities Ltd. (2016) 383 ITR 1 (SC) and CIT, Delhi Vs. Bharti Cellular Ltd. (2011) 330 ITR 239 (SC). Still further, it was submitted by the ld. A.R that as observed by the CIT(A), as the services rendered by the assessee did not “make available” any technical knowledge etc., thus the same did not fall within the sweep of the definition of FTS as contemplated in Article 13 of the India-U.K tax treaty. The ld. A.R further relying on the orde…