CIT v. Fortis Health Care Ltd.

41 SOT 72Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2010#14176 most cited
7

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2022.

Read the full judgment

Judgments citing CIT v. Fortis Health Care Ltd.

M/S. Standard Chartered Bank, Mumbai vs. The ACIT (It)1(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 803/MUM/2009[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2022AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blestandard Chartered Bank V. Acit – Range-1(3) Taxation Department, 23-25 Scindia House, Ballard Estate M.G. Road, 3Rd Floor N.M. Marg, Mumbai - 400038 Fort, Mumbai - 400001 Pan: Aabcs4681D (Appellant) (Respondent) Adit (It)– 2(3) V. Standard Chartered Bank Room No. 120, 1St Floor Taxation Department, 23-25 Scindia House, Ballard Estate M.G. Road, 3Rd Floor N.M. Marg, Mumbai - 400038 Fort, Mumbai - 400001 Pan: Aabcs4681D (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri P.J. Pardiwala & Assessee Represented By : Shri Fenil Bhatt Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash Department Represented By :

Section 115JSection 14ASection 90Section 90(2)

…CIT - 42 SOT 264 (Del) - Sec 44AD -UK Treaty DaimlerChrysler India - 29 SOT 502 (Pune) - Sec 79 OTHER CASES-COVERED IN FAVOUR (vii). Citibank N. A. v. ACIT ITA Nos. 5275 & 5276/Mum/2001 (at para 30) (Mum) - Sec 40(a)(i) (viii). DCIT v. Lazard India (P.) Ltd - 41 SOT 72 (Mum) - Sec 40(a)(i) (ix). Central Bank of India v. DCIT - 42 SOT 450 (Mum) - Sec 40(a)(i) (x). B4U International Holdings Ltd v. DCIT - 21 taxmann.com 529 (Mum) - Sec 40(a)(i) (xi). Sandoz (P.) Ltd v. ACIT - 34 taxmann.com 280 (Mum) - Sec 40(a)(i) 20. Ld. DR relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 21. Considered the rival submissions and…

Godfrey Philips India Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 8(1), Mumbai

In the result, the ground raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 5317/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Choudhary Arun Kumar Singh, D.R
Section 43B

…mway India Enterprises [(2012) 346 ITR 341 (Delhi HC)| 2. CIT v. Coromandel Fertilizers Ltd. (2014) 367 ITR 132 (AP HC) 7 M/s. God Frey Philips India Ltd. 3. CIT v. Ayesha Hospitals (P.) Ltd. (2007) 292 ITR 266 (MAD.) 4. DCIT v. Lazard India (P.) Ltd. (2010) 41 SOT 72 (Mnmbai Tribunal) 5. Urban Infrastructure Venture Capital Lid v. DCIT (2014) 150 ITD 502 (Mirmbai Tribunal) 6. DC1T v. Chayya Lakshmi Creations (P) Ltd. [ITA No.250 of 2010 (Hyderabad Tribunal) 7. DC1T v. Eureka Forbes Ltd. [ITA No.2126 of 2013 (Kolkata Tribunal) 8. ACIT vs. M/s. CB Richards Ellis South Asia Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No.3940/Del/2011) (Del. –…

Hdfc Securities Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 4(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms indicated hereinabove whereas appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 738/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Apr 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm M/S. Hdfc Securities Ltd., Vs. Dcit – 4(1) Office Floor 8 Mumbai I-Think Techno Campus Alpha Building, B Kanjurmarg (E) Mumbai – 400 042 Pan/Gir No.Aaach8215R Appellant) Respondent) .. Dcit – 4(1) (1) Vs. M/S. Hdfc Securities Ltd., Mumbai Office Floor 8 I-Think Techno Campus Alpha Building, B Kanjurmarg (E) Mumbai – 400 042 Pan/Gir No. Aaach8215R Appellant) Respondent) .. Assessee By Ms. Krupa R. Gandhi / Shri Vidhi Doshi Revenue By Shri Rajat Mittal

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 194JSection 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H ”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM M/s. HDFC Securities Ltd., Vs. DCIT – 4(1) Office Floor 8 Mumbai I-Think Techno Campus Alpha Building, B Kanjurmarg (E) Mumbai – 400 042 PAN/GIR No.AAACH8215R Appellant) Respondent) .. DCIT – 4(1) (1) Vs. M/s. HDFC Securities Ltd., Mumbai Office Floor 8 I-Think Techno Campus Alpha Building, B Kanjurmarg (E) Mumbai – 400 042 PAN/GIR No. AAACH8215R Appellant) Respondent) .. Assessee by Ms. Krupa R. Gandhi / Shri Vidhi Doshi Revenue by Shri Rajat Mittal Date of Hearing 11/04/2018 Date of Pronouncement 16/…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Modi Apollo International Group Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue for A

ITA 223/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: : Shri L.P. Sahu & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 195Section 35ASection 40

…ongesellschaft: 310 ITR 320 (Bom.) • Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd. v. DCIT: 313 ITR 263 (AT)(Mumbai) (SB) • HNS India VSAT Inc. vs. DDIT: 95 ITD 157 (Del ITAT) • Compagnie Francaise D'Etudes Et De Construction vs. IAC: 8 ITD 215 • DCIT vs. Lazard India (P) Ltd.: 41 SOT 72 (Mum ITAT) ii. Reimbursement not in the nature of FTS Even otherwise, it is respectfully submitted, the aforesaid payment is not in the nature of 'Fees for included services' as defined in Article 12 7 ITA No.223, 294/Del./11 & 5396/Del./13 of DTAA between India and USA ('the Treaty') since there is no rendering of technical services which "make…

ITO 16(3)(4), Mumbai vs. Sucheta Bakul Patkar, Mumbai

ITA 2602/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Rajendra & C.N. Prasadआयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./Ita/2602/Mum/2013,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years: 2009-10 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Income Tax Officer-16 (3)(4) Smt. Sucheta B. Patkar Matru Mandir, Tardeo Road, Jayakar Building, Avantikabai Gokhale Vs. Mumbai-400 007. Street, Opera House Mumbai-400 004. Pan:Aoppp 7947 G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Kailash Gaikwad-Dr Assessee By: Shri Arvind Sonde & Shri Mathrudev Vasudevan सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 18.07.2016 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 12.08.2016 आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयकर आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Per Rajendra, Am- अनुसार Challenging The Order,Dtd.28.01.2013,Of The Cit(A)-27,Mumbai,The Assessing Officer(Ao)Has Filed The Present Appeal.Assessee,An Individual,Is Engaged In The Business Of Distribution & Marketing Of Liquor Products,Filed Her Return Of Income On 24.09.2009,Declaring Income Of Rs.9.05 Lakhs.The Ao Completed The Assessment,U/S.143 (3) Of The Act,On 27.12.2011,Determining Her Income At Rs.73.36 Lakhs.

For Appellant: Shri Arvind Sonde &For Respondent: Shri Kailash Gaikwad-DR
Section 133Section 143Section 194HSection 254(1)Section 40

…e Authorised Representative(AR) referred to the pages 2, 5, 11 – 13 of the paper book. He relied upon the cases of Modicon Network(P) Ltd.(14 SOT 204), Willmar Schwabe India (P) Ltd.(95 TTJ 53), Nathpa Jhakri Joint Venture (37 SOT 160), Lazard India (P) Ltd. (41 SOT 72), Siemens Aktiongesellschaft (177 Taxman 81), M/s. J.B. Boda & Brothers Pvt. Ltd.(ITA/No.4252/Mum/2009 dt.21.05.2010 AY.2006-07),Karma Energy Ltd. (19 ITR (Trib.)552), Lehman Brothers & Advisors (P) Ltd.(157 ITD 1003) and Om India Trading Co.(P) Ltd.(58 taxmann.com325). 5.We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material before us. We f…

At & S India Private Limited, Karnataka vs. DCIT-Range-11, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed and that of assessee’s is allowed

ITA 2305/KOL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Oct 2015AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 4(1)Section 4(2)Section 40Section 90(2)

…ia Technology Centre Pvt. Ltd.v. (2010) CIT 327 ITR 456 (SC) iii) CIT v. Dunlop Rubber Co. Ltd. 142 ITR 493 (Cal) iv) Van Oord ACZ India (P) Ltd. v. CIT (2010) TIOL 187 v) CIT v. Fortis Health Care Ltd. 181 Taxman 257 vi) DCIT v. Lazard India Pvt. Ltd. (2010) 41 SOT 72 (Mum) vii) Nathpa Jhakri Joint Venture v. ACIT (2010) 5 ITR 75 (Mum) viii) Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd. v. DCIt (2009) 313 ITR (AT) 263 (Mum) It was also submitted that the section 90(2) of the Act provides that in case of double taxation avoidance agreement with the Govt. of another country, the provision of this act will apply only to the extent i…

D.C.I.T Cir - 11, Kolkata vs. M/S at & S India Pvt Ltd, Karnataka

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed and that of assessee’s is allowed

ITA 1160/KOL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Oct 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 4(1)Section 4(2)Section 40Section 90(2)

…ia Technology Centre Pvt. Ltd.v. (2010) CIT 327 ITR 456 (SC) iii) CIT v. Dunlop Rubber Co. Ltd. 142 ITR 493 (Cal) iv) Van Oord ACZ India (P) Ltd. v. CIT (2010) TIOL 187 v) CIT v. Fortis Health Care Ltd. 181 Taxman 257 vi) DCIT v. Lazard India Pvt. Ltd. (2010) 41 SOT 72 (Mum) vii) Nathpa Jhakri Joint Venture v. ACIT (2010) 5 ITR 75 (Mum) viii) Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd. v. DCIt (2009) 313 ITR (AT) 263 (Mum) It was also submitted that the section 90(2) of the Act provides that in case of double taxation avoidance agreement with the Govt. of another country, the provision of this act will apply only to the extent i…

CIT v. Fortis Health Care Ltd. (41 SOT 72) — Cited in 7 Judgments | BharatTax