CIT v. Faizan Shoes (P.) Ltd.

367 ITR 155High Court2014#732 most cited

What is CIT v. Faizan Shoes (P.) Ltd. authority for?

Disallowance under section 40(a)(i) for non-deduction of tax at source on export agency commission paid to a non-resident does not apply if the non-resident's income is not taxable in India under section 9(1), such as when the agent operates outside India without a permanent establishment or business connection in India.

139

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,518 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Faizan Shoes · CIT v. Faizan Shoes · section 195 · section 40(a)(i) · export agency commission · non-resident payments · TDS non-resident · income deemed to accrue · business connection · permanent establishment · section 9(1) · no tax deduction

Also reported as

48 Taxmann.com 48226 Taxmann 115

Sections most often in play

Section 195Section 9(1)(vii)Section 40(a)(i)Section 40(a)(ia)Section 143(3)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 92CASection 37

Issues it is cited on

section 9(1)(i)section 195(1)section 9(1)(vii)management feessection 40(a)(i)fees for technical servicessection 195permanent establishmentsection 9(1)business connectionnon-residentchild

Judgments citing CIT v. Faizan Shoes (P.) Ltd.

ACIT -25(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Gepach International, Mumbai

In the result both the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 5943/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Sept 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Shris. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 5943 & 5942/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14 & 2014-15)

For Appellant: Ms. Samatha, DR byFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Mehta, AR
Section 143(2)Section 195Section 40Section 9

…gn agency commission paid outside India for promotion of export sales outside India. A similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kikani Exports id. Reported in 3(9 .TC 96 and CIT vs. Faizan Skoes Pvt. Ltd. Reported in 367 ITR 155. > The decision of the Hon'ble Mumbai Tribunal in case of Armayesh Global v.ACIT (2012)(51 SOT 564) wherein it was held that export commission earned by a foreign commission agent is not taxable in India and it also not in nature of technical or managerial services. > Decision of Delhi ITAT in case of Dy. CIT v. Angelique International Ltd. (2013…

D.C.I.T., Circle-2(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Shalimar Wires Industries Ltd., Kolkata

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1354/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2013-14

Section 143(3)Section 5(2)(b)Section 9(1)

…rvices rendered outside India; (b) the Tax Deduction at Source (TDS) is required to be made on all payments to non-residents, only if such payments are liable to be taxed in India. (c) following the decision of this Court, CIT v. Faizan Shoes (P.) Ltd. [2014] 367 ITR 155/226 Taxman 115/48 taxmann.com 48 (Mad.), the assessee is not liable to deduct tax at source, when the non-resident agent provides services outside India on payment of commission. 5.2 The contention of the Revenue is that such services are attracted by Explanation (2) to Section 9 (1) (vii) of the Act and therefore TDS certificate is essential. 6…

M/S. Electrosteel Casting Limited., Kolkata vs. ITO (International Taxation) Ward, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 140/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Sept 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey)

Section 133(6)Section 201(1)Section 250Section 9(1)(vii)Section 9(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA (Before Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member & Sri Aby T. Varkey, Judicial Member) I.T.A. No. 140/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/s. Electrosteel Casting Ltd......................................................................................................... Appellant [PAN : AAACE 4975 B] Vs. ITO (International Taxation) Ward, Kolkata.………….....................................…......……....Respondent Appearances by: Sh. S.K. Tulsiyan, Adv., appeared on behalf of the Assessee. Sh. N.B. Som, Addl. CIT(DR), appeared on behalf of the Revenue.…

Bimetal Bearings Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year

ITA 671/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 668, 669, 670 & 671/Chny/2015 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2007-08 To 2010-11 M/S. Bimetal Bearings Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of 18, Race Course Road, Vs. Income Tax, Large Taxpayer Unit, Coimbatore 641 018. 1775, Jawaharlal Nehru Inner Ring Road, Anna Nagar Western Extension, [Pan:Aaacb2036Q] Chennai 600 101. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 02.07.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.08.2019 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: These Four Appeals Filed By The Same Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 17, Chennai All Dated 30.01.2015 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11. Since Common Issues Have Been Raised In These Appeals, Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Brevity.

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 14ASection 40

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘‘ए” "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी धु"ु" आर.एल रे"ी, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद" के सम" Before Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member & Shri S. Jayaraman, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 668, 669, 670 & 671/Chny/2015 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2007-08 to 2010-11 M/s. Bimetal Bearings Limited, The Deputy Commissioner of 18, Race Course Road, Vs. Income Tax, Large Taxpayer Unit, Coimbatore 641 018. 1775, Jawaharlal Nehru Inner Ring Road, Anna Nagar Western Extension, [PAN:AAACB2036Q] Chennai 600 101. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Resp…

Bimetal Bearings Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year

ITA 670/CHNY/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Aug 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 668, 669, 670 & 671/Chny/2015 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2007-08 To 2010-11 M/S. Bimetal Bearings Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of 18, Race Course Road, Vs. Income Tax, Large Taxpayer Unit, Coimbatore 641 018. 1775, Jawaharlal Nehru Inner Ring Road, Anna Nagar Western Extension, [Pan:Aaacb2036Q] Chennai 600 101. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 02.07.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.08.2019 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: These Four Appeals Filed By The Same Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 17, Chennai All Dated 30.01.2015 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11. Since Common Issues Have Been Raised In These Appeals, Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Brevity.

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 14ASection 40

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘‘ए” "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी धु"ु" आर.एल रे"ी, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद" के सम" Before Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member & Shri S. Jayaraman, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 668, 669, 670 & 671/Chny/2015 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2007-08 to 2010-11 M/s. Bimetal Bearings Limited, The Deputy Commissioner of 18, Race Course Road, Vs. Income Tax, Large Taxpayer Unit, Coimbatore 641 018. 1775, Jawaharlal Nehru Inner Ring Road, Anna Nagar Western Extension, [PAN:AAACB2036Q] Chennai 600 101. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Resp…

Bimetal Bearings Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year

ITA 669/CHNY/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Aug 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 668, 669, 670 & 671/Chny/2015 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2007-08 To 2010-11 M/S. Bimetal Bearings Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of 18, Race Course Road, Vs. Income Tax, Large Taxpayer Unit, Coimbatore 641 018. 1775, Jawaharlal Nehru Inner Ring Road, Anna Nagar Western Extension, [Pan:Aaacb2036Q] Chennai 600 101. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 02.07.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.08.2019 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: These Four Appeals Filed By The Same Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 17, Chennai All Dated 30.01.2015 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11. Since Common Issues Have Been Raised In These Appeals, Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Brevity.

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 14ASection 40

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘‘ए” "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी धु"ु" आर.एल रे"ी, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद" के सम" Before Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member & Shri S. Jayaraman, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 668, 669, 670 & 671/Chny/2015 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2007-08 to 2010-11 M/s. Bimetal Bearings Limited, The Deputy Commissioner of 18, Race Course Road, Vs. Income Tax, Large Taxpayer Unit, Coimbatore 641 018. 1775, Jawaharlal Nehru Inner Ring Road, Anna Nagar Western Extension, [PAN:AAACB2036Q] Chennai 600 101. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Resp…

Bimetal Bearings Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year

ITA 668/CHNY/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Aug 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 668, 669, 670 & 671/Chny/2015 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2007-08 To 2010-11 M/S. Bimetal Bearings Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of 18, Race Course Road, Vs. Income Tax, Large Taxpayer Unit, Coimbatore 641 018. 1775, Jawaharlal Nehru Inner Ring Road, Anna Nagar Western Extension, [Pan:Aaacb2036Q] Chennai 600 101. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 02.07.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.08.2019 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: These Four Appeals Filed By The Same Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 17, Chennai All Dated 30.01.2015 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11. Since Common Issues Have Been Raised In These Appeals, Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Brevity.

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 14ASection 40

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘‘ए” "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी धु"ु" आर.एल रे"ी, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद" के सम" Before Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member & Shri S. Jayaraman, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 668, 669, 670 & 671/Chny/2015 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2007-08 to 2010-11 M/s. Bimetal Bearings Limited, The Deputy Commissioner of 18, Race Course Road, Vs. Income Tax, Large Taxpayer Unit, Coimbatore 641 018. 1775, Jawaharlal Nehru Inner Ring Road, Anna Nagar Western Extension, [PAN:AAACB2036Q] Chennai 600 101. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Resp…

ITO 3(3)2, Mumbai vs. Shamrock Pharmachemi P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1774/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.1774/Mum/2013 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) बिाम/ Ito 3(3)2, M/S. Shamrock R.No. 602, Pharmachemi Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, 83E,Hansraj Pragi Bldg., V. M.K Road, Opp. Dr. E Moses Road, Mumbai 400020 Worli, Mumbai-400018 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan: Aaacs6290H (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Revenue By: Shri. Ashim Kumar Modi (Cit- Dr), Shri V. Justin & Ms. Chaitna Ajaria Shri. Bharat L. Gandhi Assessee By: सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 01.03.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.05.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar: This Appeal, Filed By Revenue, Being Ita No. 1774/Mum/2013, Is Directed Against Appellate Order Dated 29.10.2012, Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Mumbai (Hereinafter Called ―The Cit(A)‖) In Appeal Number Cit(A)-7/Ito-3(3)(2)/It-166/11-12, For Assessment Year 2009-10, The Appellate Proceedings Had Arisen Before Learned Cit(A) From The Assessment Order Dated 29.12.2011 Passed By Learned Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Called ―The Ao‖) U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ―The Act‖) For Ay 2009-10. I.T.A. No.1774/Mum/2013

For Respondent: Shri. Ashim Kumar Modi (CIT-
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 68

…rvices rendered outside India; (b) the Tax Deduction at Source (TDS) is required to be made on all payments to non-residents, only if such payments are liable to be taxed in India. (c) following the decision of this Court, CIT v. Faizan Shoes (P.) Ltd. [2014] 367 ITR 155/226 Taxman 115/48 taxmann.com 48 (Mad.), the assessee is not liable to deduct tax at source, when the non-resident agent provides services outside India on payment of commission. 5.2 The contention of the Revenue is that such services are attracted by Explanation (2) to Section 9 (1) (vii) of the Act and therefore TDS certificate is essential. 6.…

M/S. Satyam Polyplast, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4, Jaipur

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

ITA 158/JPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 May 2019AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri V.K. Jain (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri K.C. Meena (ACIT)
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 40

…as the decision of Mumbai Benches of the Tribunal in case of Armayesh Global vs. ACIT 51 SOT 564. The ld. AR has also relied upon the following decisions:- • CIT vs. Fluidtherm Technology (P) Ltd. (2015 Taxman.com 87 (Madras). • CIT vs. Faizan Shoes (P) Ltd. 367 ITR 155. • CIT vs. Gujarat Reclaim Rubber Products (P) Ltd. ( Mumbai High Court.) • CIT vs. Toshuku Ltd. 125 ITR 525(SC) • CIT vs. Sea Resources Ltd. (Bombay High Court) • ITO vs. Excel Chemical India Ltd. (Ahmedabad Bench). • ACIT vs. Pahilajrai Jaikishan (Mumbai Bench). 4. On the other hand, the ld. DR has submitted that as per provisions of Section…

The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Indo Colchem Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 840/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Kishan M. Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ranjan Kumar Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40

…rvices rendered outside India; (b) the Tax Deduction at Source (TDS) is required to be made on all payments to non-residents, only if such payments are liable to be taxed in India. (c) following the decision of this Court, CIT v. Faizan Shoes (P.) Ltd. [2014] 367 ITR 155/226 Taxman 115/48 taxmann.com 48 (Mad.), the assessee is not liable to deduct tax at source, when the non-resident agent provides services outside India on payment of commission. 5.2 The contention of the Revenue is that such services are attracted by Explanation (2) to Section 9 (1) (vii) of the Act and therefore TDS certificate is essential. 6.…

The ACIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Indo Colchem Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 1825/AHD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2019AY 2014-15
Section 143(3)Section 40

…ITA No. 1825/Ahd/2017 ACIT Vs. Indo Colchem Pvt Ltd Assessment Year : 2014-15 Page 1 of 29 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD [Coram: Pramod Kumar, VP and Ms. Madhumita Roy, JM] Assessment Year: 2014-15 Asstt. Commissioner of Income-tax .......…………...........Appellant Circle -2(1)(1), Ahmedabad Vs. Indo Colchem Pvt Ltd ............................Respondent 36-2, Phase-II, GIDC Estate, Vatva, Ahmedabad – 382 425 [PAN : AAACI 4393 K] Appearances by: Ranjan Kumar Singh, for the Appellant Kishor M Mehta, for the Respondent Date of concluding the hearing : 29.04.2019 Date of pronounc…

ACIT, Circle-4(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Goodricke Group Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 895/KOL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Apr 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey , Jm &

Section 143(3)Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C”, BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY , JM & SHRI M.BALAGANESH, AM ACIT, Circle 4(1) Vs. M/s. Goodricke Group Ltd., Kolkata Camelia House P-7, Chowringhee Square 14, Gurusaday Road, 8th Floor, Kolkata – 700 069 Kolkata – 700 019 PAN/GIR No.AABCG1614Q (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Revenue by Shri Sankar Halder Assessee by Shri Tanmay Dutta Date of Hearing 04/04/2019 Date of Pronouncement 26/04/2019 आदेश / O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH (A.M): This appeal in ITA No.895/Kol/2017 for A.Y.2008-09 arises out of the order by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-17,…

DCIT 2(2), Mumbai vs. Knight Frank (I) P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and the revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 3256/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Mar 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu (Vp) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2009-2010 M/S Knight Frank (I) Pvt. Ltd., The Addl. Commissioner Of C/O Kalyaniwalla & Mistry, Income Tax – 2(2), Army & Navy Building, Room No. 548, 5Th Floor, 3Rd Floor, 148 M.G. Road, Fort, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Marg, Mumbai - 400001 Mumbai Pan: Aaack1544J (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2009-2010 The Dcit – 2(2), M/S Knight Frank (India) Pvt. Ltd. Room No. 545, Paville House, Near Twin Towers, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Off. Veer Savarkar Marg, Mumbai - 400020 Vs. Prabhadevi, Mumbai - 400025 Pan: Aaack1544J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri M.M. Golwala & Amey Wagle (Ar) Revenue By : Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav & S.K. Mishra (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 21/12/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 18/03/2019

For Appellant: Shri M.M. Golwala & Amey Wagle (AR)For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav &
Section 143Section 145Section 145ASection 251(2)Section 40Section 43BSection 9

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “A”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU (VP) AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM) Assessment Year: 2009-2010 M/s Knight Frank (I) Pvt. Ltd., The Addl. Commissioner of C/o Kalyaniwalla & Mistry, Income Tax – 2(2), Army & Navy Building, Room No. 548, 5th Floor, 3rd Floor, 148 M.G. Road, Fort, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Marg, Mumbai - 400001 Mumbai PAN: AAACK1544J (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2009-2010 The DCIT – 2(2), M/s Knight Frank (India) Pvt. Ltd. Room No. 545, Paville House, Near Twin Towers, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Off. Veer Savarkar Marg, Mumbai - 400020…

DCIT, Circle-2 (1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Jagson Colorchem Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue and the cross objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 112/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Feb 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं. Ita No.112/Ahd/2017 With Co No. 32/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Asstt. Years: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Lalit P. Jain, Sr. D.RFor Respondent: Shri Karan Shah, A.R
Section 195Section 37Section 37(1)Section 40

…आयकरअपील"यअ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद"यायपीठ ‘D’- अहमदाबाद। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD – BENCH ‘D’ BEFORE SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. ITA No.112/Ahd/2017 WITH CO No. 32/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Asstt. Years: 2013-14 DCIT Vs. M/s. Jagson Colorchem Cir. 2(1)(2), Ahmedabad Ltd. 1st Floor Navjivan Trust 5601/1,PhaseII, Building, GIDC,Vatva, Ahmedabad-380 014 Ahmedabad-382445 PAN- AAACJ7664C Appellant/ Respondent Respondent / Cross Objector Assessee by : Shri Lalit P. Jain, Sr. D.R Revenue by : Shri Karan Shah, A.R सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of H…

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)

…ction of tax at source towards disallowance of expenditure incurred on overseas commission. On appeal the Ld.CIT(A) deleted the addition by relying in the decision of the Jurisdictional Madras High Court in the case CIT vs. Faizan Shoes Pvt. Ltd., reported in 367 ITR 155. 4. At the outset the Ld.AR submitted before us that since the Ld.CIT(A) has decided the appeal of the assessee by following the decision of the Jurisdictional High Court, no interference is required in his order. He also submitted that the facts in the case of the assessee are identical to the facts of the case decided by the Hon’ble Jurisdictio…

DCIT, Central Circle - 1(4), Kolkata vs. M/S. Hindustan Urban Infrastructure Ltd.(Hindustan Vidyut Product Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 1616/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganesh

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 246ASection 271(1)(c)Section 40Section 40ASection 9(1)(vii)

…rvices rendered outside India; (b) the Tax Deduction at Source (TDS) is required to be made on all payments to non-residents, only if such payments are liable to be taxed in India. (c) following the decision of this Court, CIT v. Faizan Shoes (P.) Ltd. [2014] 367 ITR 155/226 Taxman 115/48 taxmann.com 48 (Mad.), the assessee is not liable to deduct tax at source, when the non- resident agent provides services outside India on payment of commission. 5.2 The contention of the Revenue is that such services are attracted by Explanation (2) to Section 9 (1) (vii) of the Act and therefore TDS certificate is essential. 6…

DCIT, Central Circle - 1(4), Kolkata vs. M/S. Hindustan Urban Infrastructure Ltd.(Hindustan Vidyut Product Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 1615/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganesh

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 246ASection 271(1)(c)Section 40Section 40ASection 9(1)(vii)

…rvices rendered outside India; (b) the Tax Deduction at Source (TDS) is required to be made on all payments to non-residents, only if such payments are liable to be taxed in India. (c) following the decision of this Court, CIT v. Faizan Shoes (P.) Ltd. [2014] 367 ITR 155/226 Taxman 115/48 taxmann.com 48 (Mad.), the assessee is not liable to deduct tax at source, when the non- resident agent provides services outside India on payment of commission. 5.2 The contention of the Revenue is that such services are attracted by Explanation (2) to Section 9 (1) (vii) of the Act and therefore TDS certificate is essential. 6…

Karnavati Engineering Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD) Circle-4, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1400/AHD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Oct 2018AY 2010-11
Section 143(3)Section 40

…ITA No.1400/Ahd/2017 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Page 1 of 27 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AHMEDABAD D BENCH, AHMEDABAD [Coram: Pramod Kumar AM and Mahavir Prasad JM] ITA No.: 1400/Ahd/17 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Karnavati Engineering Ltd., ……………………..Appellant Cadila Corporate Campus, Sarkhej Dholka Road, Bhat, Ahmedabad. [PAN: AAACK 6047 Q] Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD)-1, Circle – 4, Ahmedabad. ……………..…........Respondent Appearances by S N Soparkar for the appellant Keyur Patel for the respondent July 24th, 2018 Date of concluding the hearing : October 15th, 2018 Date of pronouncement :…

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)

…s been dealt in by various decisions of Appellate Courts including those cited herein above. Reference is made to the recent judgment of Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Faizan Shoes (P) Ltd. [2014J 48 taxmann.com 48 (Mad) equivalent to [2014J 367 ITR 155 (Mad). In this case the Hon Hon'ble High Court, after referring to the Explanation to Section 9(2) of the Act inserted by Finance Act 2010 and also the Circular No. 7/2009 dated 22.10.2009 and also the provisions of sec. 9 of the Act, held that the services rendered by the non-resident agent can at best be called service for completion of the exp…

Pakkar Leather Export Company, Chennai vs. ACIT Ncc-5, Chennai

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

ITA 2015/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Sept 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru R.L.Reddy

For Respondent: Mrs.S.Vijayaprabha, DCIT
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 195(1)Section 40Section 9(1)(i)Section 917

…he AO. 5. On being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal and the Ld.Counsel for the assessee has submitted that this case is clearly covered in favour of the assessee by the decision in the case of M/s.Faizan Shoes (P) Ltd., reported in 367 ITR 155 (Mad) and prayed that the same should be followed. On the other hand, the Ld.DR has supported the order of the authorities below. 6. We have heard both the sides and gone through the materials placed on record. 7. With regard to this issue, as to whether the TDS has to be deducted or not when the commission payment made to the overseas agenc…