CIT v. De Beers India Minerals (P.) Ltd.

346 ITR 467High Court2012#199 most cited

What is CIT v. De Beers India Minerals (P.) Ltd. authority for?

For fees for technical or consultancy services to 'make available' technical knowledge or know-how under a DTAA, the service must transmit such knowledge, allowing the recipient to derive an enduring benefit and utilize it independently in the future.

371

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,164 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. De Beers India Minerals · 346 ITR 467 · make available clause · fees for technical services · fees for included services · Article 12(4) India-USA DTAA · section 9(1)(vii) · section 90(2) · enduring benefit · DTAA interpretation · withholding tax non-resident

Also reported as

21 Taxmann.com 2142012 SCC OnLine KAR 8858

Sections most often in play

Section 9(1)(vii)Section 195Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 147Section 1961Section 90(2)Section 143(2)

Issues it is cited on

fees for included servicesmake available clausesection 9(1)(vii)(b)section 9(1)(vii)fees for technical servicesenduring benefitsection 90(2)section 9(1)tax treatysection 9(1)(vi)section 195computer software

Judgments citing CIT v. De Beers India Minerals (P.) Ltd.

M/S Hindustan Aeronautics Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 83/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Mar 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri George George K & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Kumar Jain & Siddhesh Chaugule, ARsFor Respondent: Smt. S Praveena, CIT(DRP-2)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 250Section 40Section 40aSection 9(1)(vii)

…ss the person receiving the services is enabled to utilize such services on its own in the future without having recourse to the person providing the service. The Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. De Beers India Minerals Pvt. Limited (2012): 346 ITR 467 (Kar) while considering a similar issue has held that “To be said to “make available”, the service should be aimed at and result in transmitting technical knowledge etc so that the payer of the service could derive an enduring benefit and utilize the knowledge or know-how on his own in future without the aid of the service provider. In other word…

ITO (International Taxation ), Surat vs. M/S. Star Rays, Surat

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 725/SRT/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Feb 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) The Income Tax Officer Star Rays, (International Taxation), Shivam Chambers, Vs Surat. Khand Bazar, Varachha Road, Surat – 395009. Pan: Aamfs 1942 B Appellant/ Revenue Respondent/ Assessee

Section 254(1)Section 9(1)(vii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Hearing in Virtual Court) The Income Tax Officer Star Rays, (International Taxation), Shivam Chambers, Vs Surat. Khand Bazar, Varachha Road, Surat – 395009. PAN: AAMFS 1942 B Appellant/ Revenue Respondent/ Assessee Assessee by Shri Saurabh Suparkar, Senior Advocate with Ms. Urvashi Shodhan, Advocate Revenue by Shri H.P.Meena – CIT-DR 24/01/2022 Date of hearing 28/02/2022 Date of pronouncement Order under section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER:…

M/S Wipro Limited, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 2681/BANG/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Huilgul, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Basaganni, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 195Section 40

…the assessee technical knowledge, experience, skill, know-how etc. M/s. Wipro Limited, Bangalore Page 6 of 8 The law on this point has been explained by Hon’ble jurisdictional Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. De Beers India Minerals P Ltd (2012) 346 ITR 467 as under:- “What is the meaning of "make available". The technical or consultancy service rendered should be of such a nature that it "makes available" to the recipient technical knowledge, know-how and the like. The service should be aimed at and result in transmitting technical knowledge, etc., so that the payer of the service could derive an…

M/S Orkla Asia Pacific Pte Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (It) Circle-2(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 193/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Dec 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. B.R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2015-16 M/S. Orkla Asia Pacific Pte Ltd., The Deputy C/O Mtr Foods Pvt. Ltd., Commissioner Of No. 1, 2Nd & 3Rd Floor, Income Tax (It), 100 Feet Inner Ring Road, Asmnt, Circle – 2(1), Ejipura, Vs. Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 047. Pan: Aabco4087B Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sharath Rao, Advocate : Shri Pradeep Kumar, Cit Revenue By (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 03-11-2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 30-12-2021 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against Final Assessment Order Dated 17/12/2018 Passed U/S. 143 (3) By The Ld.Dcit, Asmnt, Circle-2(1), Bangalore For Assessment Year 2015-16 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “The Grounds Mentioned Hereinafter Are Without Prejudice To One Another. 1. Barred By Limitation The Order Passed By The Learned Assessing Officer ('Learned Ao') Is Barred By Limitation In View Of The Express Provisions Of Section 144C(13) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 ('The Act') Wherein, The Order Should Be Passed Within One Month From The End Of The Month In Which Dispute

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, Advocate
Section 143Section 144C(13)Section 234ASection 234BSection 9(1)(vii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2015-16 M/s. Orkla Asia Pacific Pte Ltd., The Deputy C/o MTR Foods Pvt. Ltd., Commissioner of No. 1, 2nd & 3rd Floor, Income Tax (IT), 100 feet inner ring road, ASMNT, Circle – 2(1), Ejipura, Vs. Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 047. PAN: AABCO4087B APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Sharath Rao, Advocate : Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT Revenue by (DR) Date of Hearing : 03-11-2021 Date of Pronouncement : 30-12-2021 ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Presen…

Kennametal Inc., Bangalore vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD) (Int. Taxn), Circle-1(2), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal for AY 2014-15 is treated as allowed for statistical purpose while the appeal for AY 2012-13 is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 806/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Dec 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice- & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT (DR)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES “B” BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA. Nos. 802 to 806/Bang/2019 Assessment Years: 2009-10 to 2013-14 M/s. Kennametal Inc., The Deputy Director C/o. Kennametal India, of Income Tax (Intl. 8th /9th Mile, Taxn), Tumkur Road, Circle-1(1), Bangalore – 560 073. vs. Bangalore. PAN: AACCK6397B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri K.R. Vasudevan, Advocate Revenue by : Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT (DR) Date of Hearing : 11.11.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 09.12.2021 ORDER PER SHRI CH…

M/S. Kennametal Inc., Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, (Intl. Taxn), Ward - 1(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal for AY 2014-15 is treated as allowed for statistical purpose while the appeal for AY 2012-13 is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 805/BANG/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Dec 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice- & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT (DR)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES “B” BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA. Nos. 802 to 806/Bang/2019 Assessment Years: 2009-10 to 2013-14 M/s. Kennametal Inc., The Deputy Director C/o. Kennametal India, of Income Tax (Intl. 8th /9th Mile, Taxn), Tumkur Road, Circle-1(1), Bangalore – 560 073. vs. Bangalore. PAN: AACCK6397B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri K.R. Vasudevan, Advocate Revenue by : Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT (DR) Date of Hearing : 11.11.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 09.12.2021 ORDER PER SHRI CH…

M/S Kennametal Inc, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer (International Taxation) Ward-1(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal for AY 2014-15 is treated as allowed for statistical purpose while the appeal for AY 2012-13 is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 804/BANG/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Dec 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice- & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT (DR)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES “B” BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA. Nos. 802 to 806/Bang/2019 Assessment Years: 2009-10 to 2013-14 M/s. Kennametal Inc., The Deputy Director C/o. Kennametal India, of Income Tax (Intl. 8th /9th Mile, Taxn), Tumkur Road, Circle-1(1), Bangalore – 560 073. vs. Bangalore. PAN: AACCK6397B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri K.R. Vasudevan, Advocate Revenue by : Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT (DR) Date of Hearing : 11.11.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 09.12.2021 ORDER PER SHRI CH…

M/S Kennametal Inc, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer (International Taxation) Ward-1(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal for AY 2014-15 is treated as allowed for statistical purpose while the appeal for AY 2012-13 is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 803/BANG/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Dec 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice- & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT (DR)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES “B” BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA. Nos. 802 to 806/Bang/2019 Assessment Years: 2009-10 to 2013-14 M/s. Kennametal Inc., The Deputy Director C/o. Kennametal India, of Income Tax (Intl. 8th /9th Mile, Taxn), Tumkur Road, Circle-1(1), Bangalore – 560 073. vs. Bangalore. PAN: AACCK6397B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri K.R. Vasudevan, Advocate Revenue by : Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT (DR) Date of Hearing : 11.11.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 09.12.2021 ORDER PER SHRI CH…

M/S Kennametal Inc, Bangalore vs. Deputy Director of Income Tax ( International Taxation) Circle-1(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal for AY 2014-15 is treated as allowed for statistical purpose while the appeal for AY 2012-13 is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 802/BANG/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Dec 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice- & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT (DR)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES “B” BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA. Nos. 802 to 806/Bang/2019 Assessment Years: 2009-10 to 2013-14 M/s. Kennametal Inc., The Deputy Director C/o. Kennametal India, of Income Tax (Intl. 8th /9th Mile, Taxn), Tumkur Road, Circle-1(1), Bangalore – 560 073. vs. Bangalore. PAN: AACCK6397B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri K.R. Vasudevan, Advocate Revenue by : Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT (DR) Date of Hearing : 11.11.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 09.12.2021 ORDER PER SHRI CH…

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…

DCIT, Circle - 6(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Forum Homes Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above

ITA 5804/MUM/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Oct 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri Rajesh Kumar ()

Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

…1 ITA 5804/Mum/2018 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A. No.5804/Mum/2018 (Assessment year 2015-16) DCIT, Cir.6(3)(1), Mumbai vs M/s Forum Homes Pvt Ltd 102, Tower-B, 1st Floor Peninsula Business Park, Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel (W) Mumbai-400 013 PAN : AACCF1005F APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Shri N Padmnabhan, Sr.DR Respondent by Shri Nitesh Joshi, AR Date of hearing 08-09-2021 Date of pronouncement 04-10-2021 O R D E R Per Saktijit Dey (JM): This is an appeal by the revenue against or…

DCIT, Circle- 1(1)(2), International Taxation, New Delhi vs. Bombardier Transportation Sweden Ab, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 8338/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Sept 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Sh. Deepak Chopra, advFor Respondent: Sh. Bhuvnesh Kulshrestha, CIT DR

…vices' only if the twin test of rendering services and making technical knowledge available at the same time is satisfied. For this, we derive support from the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of De Beers India Minerals Private Limited 346 ITR 467. 26. In consideration of totality of facts, we are of the opinion that the intermediary services rendered by the appellant do not make available any technical knowledge, skill etc to BTIN and BTIN is not a equipped to apply technology contained in services rendered by the appellant. Therefore, the ITA Nos. 8246, 8247 & 8338/Del/2018 4 Bombardier…

Bombardier Transportation Sweden Ab, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 1(1)(2), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 8247/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Sept 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Sh. Deepak Chopra, advFor Respondent: Sh. Bhuvnesh Kulshrestha, CIT DR

…vices' only if the twin test of rendering services and making technical knowledge available at the same time is satisfied. For this, we derive support from the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of De Beers India Minerals Private Limited 346 ITR 467. 26. In consideration of totality of facts, we are of the opinion that the intermediary services rendered by the appellant do not make available any technical knowledge, skill etc to BTIN and BTIN is not a equipped to apply technology contained in services rendered by the appellant. Therefore, the ITA Nos. 8246, 8247 & 8338/Del/2018 4 Bombardier…

Bombardier Transportation Sweden Ab, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 1(1)(2), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 8246/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Sept 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Sh. Deepak Chopra, advFor Respondent: Sh. Bhuvnesh Kulshrestha, CIT DR

…vices' only if the twin test of rendering services and making technical knowledge available at the same time is satisfied. For this, we derive support from the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of De Beers India Minerals Private Limited 346 ITR 467. 26. In consideration of totality of facts, we are of the opinion that the intermediary services rendered by the appellant do not make available any technical knowledge, skill etc to BTIN and BTIN is not a equipped to apply technology contained in services rendered by the appellant. Therefore, the ITA Nos. 8246, 8247 & 8338/Del/2018 4 Bombardier…

Inter Continental Hotels Group (Asia Pacific) Pte Ltd., Singapore vs. ACIT, Circle- 2(1)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4524/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Sh. S. K. Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Umesh Takyar, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 144C(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘D’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Kul Bharat, Judicial Member Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member (Through Video Conferencing) ITA No. 4524/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Inter Continental Hotels Group (Asia Vs ACIT, Pacific) Pte. Ltd., 230, Victoria Circle-2(1)(1), Street, #13-00, Bugis Junction New Delhi Towers, Singapore (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AABCI6407M Assessee by : Sh. S. K. Agarwal, CA Revenue by : Sh. Umesh Takyar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 20.09.2021 Date of Pronouncement: 24.09.2021 ORDER Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member: The present app…

Trigo Sas, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, (International Taxation) -2, Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 768/PUN/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Sept 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 768/Pun/2018 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Trigo Sas 101-103, Fortune Business Center, Baner, Pune-411 007 Pan : Aafct1290F .......अपीलाथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, (International Taxation)-2, Pune. ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Ketan VedFor Respondent: Shri Mahadevan A M Krishnan

…ndian entity, it did not result in making available any technical knowhow etc. to the India entity. The term „make available‟ had come up for consideration before the Hon‟ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. De Beers India Minerals Pvt. Ltd. (2012) 346 ITR 467 (kar.), wherein it has been held that this term means that the payer of the services should be able to utilize the acquired knowledge or knowhow at his own in future without the aid of the service provider. The Authority for Advance Ruling in Production resources group, in Re (2018) 401 ITR 56 AAR has also held that “make available” connotes some…

Cadila Healthcare Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal for the assessment year 2013-14 is also partly allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 213/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Aug 2021AY 2013-14
Section 143(3)

…tegra. There are at least two non-jurisdictional High Court decisions, namely Honble Delhi High Court in the case of DIT Vs Guy Carpenter & Co Ltd ([(2012) 346 ITR 504 (Del)] and Honble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs De Beers India Pvt Ltd [(2012) 346 ITR 467 (Kar)] in favour of the assessee, and there is no contrary decision by Honble jurisdictional High Court or by Honble Supreme Court. In De Beers case (supra), Their Lordships posed the question, as to “what is meaning of make available”, to themselves, and proceeded to deal with it as follows: The technical or consultancy service rendered should…

Cadila Healthcare Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal for the assessment year 2013-14 is also partly allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 954/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Aug 2021AY 2012-13
Section 143(3)

…tegra. There are at least two non-jurisdictional High Court decisions, namely Honble Delhi High Court in the case of DIT Vs Guy Carpenter & Co Ltd ([(2012) 346 ITR 504 (Del)] and Honble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs De Beers India Pvt Ltd [(2012) 346 ITR 467 (Kar)] in favour of the assessee, and there is no contrary decision by Honble jurisdictional High Court or by Honble Supreme Court. In De Beers case (supra), Their Lordships posed the question, as to “what is meaning of make available”, to themselves, and proceeded to deal with it as follows: The technical or consultancy service rendered should…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Hero Honda Motors Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6302/DEL/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Apr 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2005-06

Section 14ASection 32(1)(iia)Section 80I

…t only enjoy the services, but is unable to apply know-how behind the service, then the income would not satisfy the test of “make available”. Reliance for the aforesaid meaning was placed on the following decisions: • CIT vs. De Beers India Minerals (P) Ltd: 346 ITR 467 (Karnataka) • DIT vs. Guy Carpenter & Co Ltd: 346 ITR 504 (Del-HC) • Raymond Ltd v. DCIT: 86 ITD 791 (Mumbai) • Ernst & Young India: 323 ITR 184 (AAR) • ICICI Bank Ltd. v. DCIT: (2008) 20 SOT 453 (Mum) • Bharti AXA: 326 ITR 477 (AAR) • Worley Parsons Services Pty Ltd (AAR No. 750 of 2007) 16.0.2 It was argued that the assessee had engaged the se…

M/S. Hero Motocorp Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6282/DEL/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Apr 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2005-06

Section 14ASection 32(1)(iia)Section 80I

…t only enjoy the services, but is unable to apply know-how behind the service, then the income would not satisfy the test of “make available”. Reliance for the aforesaid meaning was placed on the following decisions: • CIT vs. De Beers India Minerals (P) Ltd: 346 ITR 467 (Karnataka) • DIT vs. Guy Carpenter & Co Ltd: 346 ITR 504 (Del-HC) • Raymond Ltd v. DCIT: 86 ITD 791 (Mumbai) • Ernst & Young India: 323 ITR 184 (AAR) • ICICI Bank Ltd. v. DCIT: (2008) 20 SOT 453 (Mum) • Bharti AXA: 326 ITR 477 (AAR) • Worley Parsons Services Pty Ltd (AAR No. 750 of 2007) 16.0.2 It was argued that the assessee had engaged the se…