What is CIT v. Hyundai Heavy Industries Co. Ltd. authority for?

The Supreme Court held that the 'project completion method' and the 'percentage of completion method' are recognized accounting methods for ascertaining profit for contracts. The case affirms these methods in the context of contract accounts.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Hyundai Heavy Industries Co. Ltd.?

166 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Hyundai Heavy Industries Co. Ltd. (291 ITR 482), spanning 2011 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Hyundai Heavy Industries Co. Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 9(1)(vii), Section 143(3), Section 234B, Section 37, Section 40(a)(i), Section 115JB.

CIT v. Hyundai Heavy Industries Co. Ltd. (291 ITR 482)

Fraport Ag Frankfurt Airport Services Worldwide, New Delhi vs. ACIT (International Taxation), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 287/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Apr 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2008-09 With Assessment Year: 2009-10 With Assessment Year: 2010-11 With Assessment Year: 2011-12 With Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Fraport A.G. Frankfurt Vs. Acit/Adit, Airport Services Worldwide, International Taxation, C/O- Mohinder Puri & Co., Cas, Circle-1(2), 1-D, Vandhna Building, New Delhi 11 Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi Pan :Aaacf9749E (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 9(1)(vii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘D’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2008-09 With Assessment Year: 2009-10 With Assessment Year: 2010-11 With Assessment Year: 2011-12 With Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. Fraport A.G. Frankfurt Vs. ACIT/ADIT, Airport Services Worldwide, International Taxation, C/o- Mohinder Puri & Co., CAs, Circle-1(2), 1-D, Vandhna Building, New Delhi 11 Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi PAN :AAACF9749E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Rajan Bhatia, Advocate Ms. Ankita Mehra,…

Fraport Ag Frankfurt Airport Services Worldwide, New Delhi vs. DCIT (International Taxation), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1115/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Apr 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2008-09 With Assessment Year: 2009-10 With Assessment Year: 2010-11 With Assessment Year: 2011-12 With Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Fraport A.G. Frankfurt Vs. Acit/Adit, Airport Services Worldwide, International Taxation, C/O- Mohinder Puri & Co., Cas, Circle-1(2), 1-D, Vandhna Building, New Delhi 11 Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi Pan :Aaacf9749E (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 9(1)(vii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘D’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2008-09 With Assessment Year: 2009-10 With Assessment Year: 2010-11 With Assessment Year: 2011-12 With Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. Fraport A.G. Frankfurt Vs. ACIT/ADIT, Airport Services Worldwide, International Taxation, C/o- Mohinder Puri & Co., CAs, Circle-1(2), 1-D, Vandhna Building, New Delhi 11 Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi PAN :AAACF9749E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Rajan Bhatia, Advocate Ms. Ankita Mehra,…

Fraport Ag Frankfurt Airport Services Worldwide, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 3871/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Apr 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2008-09 With Assessment Year: 2009-10 With Assessment Year: 2010-11 With Assessment Year: 2011-12 With Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Fraport A.G. Frankfurt Vs. Acit/Adit, Airport Services Worldwide, International Taxation, C/O- Mohinder Puri & Co., Cas, Circle-1(2), 1-D, Vandhna Building, New Delhi 11 Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi Pan :Aaacf9749E (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 9(1)(vii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘D’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2008-09 With Assessment Year: 2009-10 With Assessment Year: 2010-11 With Assessment Year: 2011-12 With Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. Fraport A.G. Frankfurt Vs. ACIT/ADIT, Airport Services Worldwide, International Taxation, C/o- Mohinder Puri & Co., CAs, Circle-1(2), 1-D, Vandhna Building, New Delhi 11 Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi PAN :AAACF9749E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Rajan Bhatia, Advocate Ms. Ankita Mehra,…

Fraport Ag Frankfurt Airport Services Worldwide, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 3870/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Apr 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2008-09 With Assessment Year: 2009-10 With Assessment Year: 2010-11 With Assessment Year: 2011-12 With Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Fraport A.G. Frankfurt Vs. Acit/Adit, Airport Services Worldwide, International Taxation, C/O- Mohinder Puri & Co., Cas, Circle-1(2), 1-D, Vandhna Building, New Delhi 11 Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi Pan :Aaacf9749E (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 9(1)(vii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘D’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2008-09 With Assessment Year: 2009-10 With Assessment Year: 2010-11 With Assessment Year: 2011-12 With Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. Fraport A.G. Frankfurt Vs. ACIT/ADIT, Airport Services Worldwide, International Taxation, C/o- Mohinder Puri & Co., CAs, Circle-1(2), 1-D, Vandhna Building, New Delhi 11 Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi PAN :AAACF9749E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Rajan Bhatia, Advocate Ms. Ankita Mehra,…

Fraport Ag Frankfurt Airport Services Worldwide, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 3869/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Apr 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2008-09 With Assessment Year: 2009-10 With Assessment Year: 2010-11 With Assessment Year: 2011-12 With Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Fraport A.G. Frankfurt Vs. Acit/Adit, Airport Services Worldwide, International Taxation, C/O- Mohinder Puri & Co., Cas, Circle-1(2), 1-D, Vandhna Building, New Delhi 11 Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi Pan :Aaacf9749E (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 9(1)(vii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘D’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2008-09 With Assessment Year: 2009-10 With Assessment Year: 2010-11 With Assessment Year: 2011-12 With Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. Fraport A.G. Frankfurt Vs. ACIT/ADIT, Airport Services Worldwide, International Taxation, C/o- Mohinder Puri & Co., CAs, Circle-1(2), 1-D, Vandhna Building, New Delhi 11 Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi PAN :AAACF9749E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Rajan Bhatia, Advocate Ms. Ankita Mehra,…

Fraport A.G. Frankfurt Airport Services Worldwide, New Delhi vs. ADIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 3257/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Apr 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2008-09 With Assessment Year: 2009-10 With Assessment Year: 2010-11 With Assessment Year: 2011-12 With Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Fraport A.G. Frankfurt Vs. Acit/Adit, Airport Services Worldwide, International Taxation, C/O- Mohinder Puri & Co., Cas, Circle-1(2), 1-D, Vandhna Building, New Delhi 11 Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi Pan :Aaacf9749E (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 9(1)(vii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘D’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2008-09 With Assessment Year: 2009-10 With Assessment Year: 2010-11 With Assessment Year: 2011-12 With Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. Fraport A.G. Frankfurt Vs. ACIT/ADIT, Airport Services Worldwide, International Taxation, C/o- Mohinder Puri & Co., CAs, Circle-1(2), 1-D, Vandhna Building, New Delhi 11 Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi PAN :AAACF9749E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Rajan Bhatia, Advocate Ms. Ankita Mehra,…

M/S. Corporate Leisure & Property Development Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2(1)(1), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed

ITA 1053/BANG/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Feb 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Prashanth G.S., A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sankarganesh K., D.R

…contract method are recognized methods of construction project only and not applicable to assessee who receives his consideration due to him on entering into JDA. Further, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Hyundai Heavy Industries Company Ltd. (291 ITR 482), wherein held as follows:- “24. From the above it is clear that percentage completion method and compete contract method are both recognised method of construction project. Similar proposition was laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v Hyundai Heavy Industries Co. Ltd (2007) 291 ITR 482 wherein Hon'ble. Apex Court held as follow…

Smiths Detection Asia Pacific Pte Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-3(1)(2) Int. Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2258/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Feb 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: ShriHimanshu Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain – CIT-DR

Section 143(3)

…ia and title to the property in the equipment passed outside of India. 14. Strong reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ishikawajima Harima Heavy Industries Limited 288 ITR 408 and Hyundai Heavy Industries Co. Ltd 291 ITR 482. 15. Per contra, the ld. DR strongly supported the findings of the Assessing Officer/DRP. Referring to the remand report submitted by the Assessing Officer, the ld. DR pointed out that via communication letter written by the assessee company to the CIAL dated 22.08.2018 and communication addressed to the AAI, the assessee on its own accord, di…

ACIT, Chennai vs. Tractors and Farm Equipment Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 151/CHNY/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.151/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Tractors & Farm Income Tax, Corporate Circle 3(1), Equipment Ltd., No. 33, Pottipatti New Block, 4Th Floor, 121, Mahatma Plaza, N.H. Road, Chennai 600 034. Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034. [Pan: Aaact2761Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Boopathi, Addl. Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 21.11.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Chennai, Dated 28.09.2017 For The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The First Ground Raised In The Appeal Of The Revenue Is Relating To Deletion Of Addition Made Towards Provision For Sales Incentive Expenses Included In The Project Promotion Expenses. In The Assessment Order, The Assessing Officer Has Noted That In The Product

For Appellant: Shri R. Boopathi, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate

…business connection in India nor any Permanent Establishment in India. Thus the Tribunal held that no income accrues or 6 I.T.A. No.151/Chny/18 arises or deemed to accrue or arise in India. The Supreme Court in the case of Hyundai Heavy Industries Co. Ltd., 291 ITR 482 held that it is the act of setting out a permanent establishment which triggers the taxability of transaction in the source state, therefore, unless the permanent establishment is set up, the question of taxability does not arise. The judgements cited by the appellant in the written submissions above are also applicable. In view of the above, no…

M/S. Trishul Buildtech & Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bengaluru

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 109/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, D.R

Section 250

…antial question of law arises. Consequently, finding no merit in these appeals, the same are dismissed." 38. It is well settled that the project completion method is one of the recognized methods of accounting. In CIT v Hyundai Heavy Industries Co. Ltd (2007) 291 ITR 482/161 Taxman 191 (SC) the Supreme Court held as follows:- "Lastly, there is a concept in accounts which is called the concept of contract accounts. ITA Nos.107 to 109/Bang/2022 M/s. Trishul Buildtech & Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 92 of 115 Under that concept, two methods exist for ascertaining profit for contracts, namely, "complete…

M/S. Trishul Buildtech & Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bengaluru

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 108/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, D.R

Section 250

…antial question of law arises. Consequently, finding no merit in these appeals, the same are dismissed." 38. It is well settled that the project completion method is one of the recognized methods of accounting. In CIT v Hyundai Heavy Industries Co. Ltd (2007) 291 ITR 482/161 Taxman 191 (SC) the Supreme Court held as follows:- "Lastly, there is a concept in accounts which is called the concept of contract accounts. ITA Nos.107 to 109/Bang/2022 M/s. Trishul Buildtech & Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 92 of 115 Under that concept, two methods exist for ascertaining profit for contracts, namely, "complete…

M/S. Trishul Buildtech & Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bengaluru

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 107/BANG/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, D.R

Section 250

…antial question of law arises. Consequently, finding no merit in these appeals, the same are dismissed." 38. It is well settled that the project completion method is one of the recognized methods of accounting. In CIT v Hyundai Heavy Industries Co. Ltd (2007) 291 ITR 482/161 Taxman 191 (SC) the Supreme Court held as follows:- "Lastly, there is a concept in accounts which is called the concept of contract accounts. ITA Nos.107 to 109/Bang/2022 M/s. Trishul Buildtech & Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 92 of 115 Under that concept, two methods exist for ascertaining profit for contracts, namely, "complete…

Shinhan Bank, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 4(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the cross-objection is dismissed

ITA 2229/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Section 143(3)

…e entire profit computation is thus based on this fiction. We must also remember that the taxable unit is the foreign company itself, and not the Indian PE. As observed by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs Hyundai Heavy Industries Co Ltd [(2007) 291 ITR 482 (SC)], “it is clear that under the Act, a taxable unit is a foreign ITA Nos. 2227 & 2229/Mum/2017and 7345 & 7347/Mum/2018 CO Nos.: 17 & 18/Mum/ 2021; Assessment years: 2012-13 to 2015-16 Page 13 of 33 company and not its branch or PE in India”. It is in this light that one has to analyze the fact situation that we are dealing with. The assessee…

Shinhan Bank, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 4(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the cross-objection is dismissed

ITA 2227/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Nov 2022AY 2013-14

Section 143(3)

…e entire profit computation is thus based on this fiction. We must also remember that the taxable unit is the foreign company itself, and not the Indian PE. As observed by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs Hyundai Heavy Industries Co Ltd [(2007) 291 ITR 482 (SC)], “it is clear that under the Act, a taxable unit is a foreign ITA Nos. 2227 & 2229/Mum/2017and 7345 & 7347/Mum/2018 CO Nos.: 17 & 18/Mum/ 2021; Assessment years: 2012-13 to 2015-16 Page 13 of 33 company and not its branch or PE in India”. It is in this light that one has to analyze the fact situation that we are dealing with. The assessee…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circel-2(1), Bangalore vs. Sri Mathikere Ramaiah Seetharam, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the COs filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 544/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri H. Nagin Khincha &For Respondent: Shri M. Mathivanan, D.R

Section 131Section 132(4)Section 153CSection 45(2)

…antial question of law arises. Consequently, finding no merit in these appeals, the same are dismissed." 38. It is well settled that the project completion method is one of the recognized methods of accounting. In CIT v Hyundai Heavy Industries Co. Ltd (2007) 291 ITR 482/161 Taxman 191 (SC) the Supreme Court held as follows:- "Lastly, there is a concept in accounts which is called the concept of contract accounts. Under that concept, two methods exist for ascertaining profit for contracts, namely, "completed contract method" and "percentage of completion method". To know the results of his operations, the contrac…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circel-2(1), Bangalore vs. Sri Mathikere Ramaiah Seetharam, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the COs filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 543/BANG/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Nov 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri H. Nagin Khincha &For Respondent: Shri M. Mathivanan, D.R

Section 131Section 132(4)Section 153CSection 45(2)

…antial question of law arises. Consequently, finding no merit in these appeals, the same are dismissed." 38. It is well settled that the project completion method is one of the recognized methods of accounting. In CIT v Hyundai Heavy Industries Co. Ltd (2007) 291 ITR 482/161 Taxman 191 (SC) the Supreme Court held as follows:- "Lastly, there is a concept in accounts which is called the concept of contract accounts. Under that concept, two methods exist for ascertaining profit for contracts, namely, "completed contract method" and "percentage of completion method". To know the results of his operations, the contrac…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circel-2(1), Bangalore vs. Sri Mathikere Ramaiah Seetharam, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the COs filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 542/BANG/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri H. Nagin Khincha &For Respondent: Shri M. Mathivanan, D.R

Section 131Section 132(4)Section 153CSection 45(2)

…antial question of law arises. Consequently, finding no merit in these appeals, the same are dismissed." 38. It is well settled that the project completion method is one of the recognized methods of accounting. In CIT v Hyundai Heavy Industries Co. Ltd (2007) 291 ITR 482/161 Taxman 191 (SC) the Supreme Court held as follows:- "Lastly, there is a concept in accounts which is called the concept of contract accounts. Under that concept, two methods exist for ascertaining profit for contracts, namely, "completed contract method" and "percentage of completion method". To know the results of his operations, the contrac…

DCIT (It) 2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Credit Suisse Ag, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and Cross

ITA 14/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

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

…o tax in India in the hands of GE and assessee therefore was liable to deduct tax at source from the same. In support of this contention, he relied heavily on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Hyundai Heavy Industries Co. Ltd. [2007] 291 ITR 482/161 Taxman 191. He submitted that permanent establishment in India has been treated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said decision as a separate profit centre and although the observation of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in this context has come as obiter dicta, the same is binding on this Special Bench. He submitted that legal jurisdiction and fi…

National Petroleum Construction Company vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 2(2) International Taxation New Delhi

Appeal is hereby allowed to the extent

C.A. No.-004964-004964 - 2022Supreme Court29 Jul 2022

Bench: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDIRA BANERJEE

Section 143(1)Section 197

…ed while exercising judicial review over the decision of the respondent under Section 197 of the Act. 14 30. The petitioner has relied upon the judgments in Ishikawajima- Harima Heavy Industries: [2007] 288 ITR 408 (SC) and Hyundai Heavy Industries: [2007] 291 ITR 482 (SC), which do not appear to be applicable to the facts of the present case. In Ishikawajima (supra), the Supreme Court held that for a non-resident entity to be taxed in India, it should carry on business through a permanent establishment in India, and income taxed is on the basis of extent appropriate to the part played by pe…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Technip France Sas, Gurgaon

In the result, appeal is dismissed

ITA 724/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Saktijit Dey, Judicialmember Assessment Year: 2011-12

Section 144C(5)Section 44BSection 44DSection 9(1)(vii)

…ritories shall be only such profits and gains as are reasonably attributable to that part of the operations carried out in India. 60. Similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Hyundai Heavy Industries Co. Ltd reported in 291 ITR 482 [SC]. So far as the allegation of the ld. 30 AY: 2011-12 DIT that the A.O has not gone through the contract is concerned, we find the assessee has filed details including the copy of the contract before the A.O who, after analyzing the same has accepted the returned income. 61. We find the A.O in the instant case, after going through the vario…

CIT v. Hyundai Heavy Industries Co. Ltd.

What is CIT v. Hyundai Heavy Industries Co. Ltd. authority for?

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Hyundai Heavy Industries Co. Ltd.

Fraport Ag Frankfurt Airport Services Worldwide, New Delhi vs. ACIT (International Taxation), New Delhi

Fraport Ag Frankfurt Airport Services Worldwide, New Delhi vs. DCIT (International Taxation), New Delhi

Fraport Ag Frankfurt Airport Services Worldwide, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Fraport Ag Frankfurt Airport Services Worldwide, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Fraport Ag Frankfurt Airport Services Worldwide, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Fraport A.G. Frankfurt Airport Services Worldwide, New Delhi vs. ADIT, New Delhi

M/S. Corporate Leisure & Property Development Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2(1)(1), Bengaluru

Smiths Detection Asia Pacific Pte Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-3(1)(2) Int. Taxation, New Delhi

ACIT, Chennai vs. Tractors and Farm Equipment Ltd., Chennai

M/S. Trishul Buildtech & Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bengaluru

M/S. Trishul Buildtech & Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bengaluru

M/S. Trishul Buildtech & Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bengaluru

Shinhan Bank, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 4(2)(1), Mumbai

Shinhan Bank, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 4(2)(1), Mumbai

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circel-2(1), Bangalore vs. Sri Mathikere Ramaiah Seetharam, Bangalore

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circel-2(1), Bangalore vs. Sri Mathikere Ramaiah Seetharam, Bangalore

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circel-2(1), Bangalore vs. Sri Mathikere Ramaiah Seetharam, Bangalore

DCIT (It) 2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Credit Suisse Ag, Mumbai

National Petroleum Construction Company vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 2(2) International Taxation New Delhi

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Technip France Sas, Gurgaon