CIT v. Herbalife International India (P.) Ltd.

384 ITR 276High Court2016#4761 most cited

What is CIT v. Herbalife International India (P.) Ltd. authority for?

Disallowance under Section 40(a)(i) for payments to a US resident is not permissible if it imposes harsher conditions than those applicable to payments made to an Indian resident, due to the non-discrimination clause in the India-US Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA).

25

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v Herbalife International India · Section 40(a)(i) · Article 26(3) India-US DTAA · non-discrimination clause · deductibility of payments to non-residents · DTAA more beneficial than Income Tax Act

Also reported as

69 Taxmann.com 205

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 195Section 26(3)Section 263Section 30Section 37(1)

Issues it is cited on

fixed place peagency pesection 44csection 9(1)(i)section 5(2)dependent agent pesection 254(2)withholding taxsection 40(a)(i)mistake apparent from recordbusiness connectionpermanent establishment

Judgments citing CIT v. Herbalife International India (P.) Ltd.

Mitsubishi Corporation India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 16(2), New Delhi

ITA 5184/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 143Section 144CSection 40

…t's own case for the A Ys 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008- 09,2009-10,2010-11 and A Y 2012-13. (b) Order passed by DRP in appellant's own case for AY 2011-12. (c) Order passed by Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of M/s Herbalife International India Limited reported in 384 ITR 276 (Del). I 2. That on facts and in law the AO/DRP erred in making a disallowance of Rs.41,82,35,222/- under section 40(a)(i) of the Act. 2.1 That on facts and in law the AO/DRP erred in holding/upholding that the benefit of non- discrimination as per Article 24(3) of the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement ('DTAA') between India and Japan is not…

Lloyd'S Register Quality Assurance Ltd (India Branch Office), Mumbai vs. ADIT 4(1), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 390/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2017AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi-ARFor Respondent: S/Shri Jasbir Chauhan-CIT and Rajguru M.V
Section 254(1)Section 44C

…आयकर अपीलीय आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, मुंबई मुंबई “ एल एल” खंडपीठ खंडपीठ आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई एल एल खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“L”Bench Mumbai सव"ी सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" सव"ी राजे"" राजे"",लेखा राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं सद"य एवं एवं, राम एवं राम राम लाल राम लाल लाल नेगी लाल नेगी नेगी, "याियक नेगी "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य सद"य Before S/Shri Rajendra,Accountant Member and Ram Lal Negi,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./389/Mum/2013, िनधा"रण अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2008-09 वष" आ…

Lloyds Register Quality Assurance Ltd., Mumbai vs. DDIT-Int, Rax.-.4(1), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 389/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2017AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi-ARFor Respondent: S/Shri Jasbir Chauhan-CIT and Rajguru M.V
Section 254(1)Section 44C

…आयकर अपीलीय आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, मुंबई मुंबई “ एल एल” खंडपीठ खंडपीठ आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई एल एल खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“L”Bench Mumbai सव"ी सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" सव"ी राजे"" राजे"",लेखा राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं सद"य एवं एवं, राम एवं राम राम लाल राम लाल लाल नेगी लाल नेगी नेगी, "याियक नेगी "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य सद"य Before S/Shri Rajendra,Accountant Member and Ram Lal Negi,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./389/Mum/2013, िनधा"रण अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2008-09 वष" आ…

Sumitomo Corporation vs. Commissioner of Income Tax-3, International Taxation, New Delhi

ITA/280/2017HC Delhi08 May 2017

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR

Section 260A(1)Section 40

…o $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 3 + ITA 280/2017 SUMITOMO CORPORATION Appellant Through: Mr. C.S. Aggarwal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Prakash Kumar, Advocate. versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI Respondent Through: Mr. Dileep Shivpuri, Senior standing counsel with Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Junior standing counsel. With 4 + ITA 281/2017 SUMITOMO CORPORATION Appellant Through: Mr. C.S. Aggarwal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Prakash Kumar, Advocate. i versus i COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3, INTERNATIONAL ; TAXATION, NEW DELHI Respondent Through: Mr. Dileep Shivpuri, Senior standin…

Sumitomo Corporation vs. Commissioner of Income Tax-3, International Taxation, New Delhi

ITA/281/2017HC Delhi08 May 2017

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR

Section 260A(1)Section 40

…o $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 3 + ITA 280/2017 SUMITOMO CORPORATION Appellant Through: Mr. C.S. Aggarwal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Prakash Kumar, Advocate. versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI Respondent Through: Mr. Dileep Shivpuri, Senior standing counsel with Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Junior standing counsel. With 4 + ITA 281/2017 SUMITOMO CORPORATION Appellant Through: Mr. C.S. Aggarwal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Prakash Kumar, Advocate. i versus i COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3, INTERNATIONAL ; TAXATION, NEW DELHI Respondent Through: Mr. Dileep Shivpuri, Senior standin…