CIT v. Hyundai Heavy Industries Co. Ltd.

291 ITR 482Supreme Court of India2007#588 most cited

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.

166

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v Hyundai Heavy Industries Co. Ltd · completed contract method · percentage of completion method · contract accounts · profit ascertainment · accounting methods · 291 ITR 482 · 161 Taxmann 191 · SC

Also reported as

161 Taxmann 191

Sections most often in play

Section 9(1)(vii)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 37Section 40(a)(i)Section 115JBSection 44CSection 195
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 44bbbsection 209(1)section 44bbsection 44csection 44bsection 145(1)fixed place pedependent agent pesection 9(1)(i)construction pesection 9(1)(vii)project completion method

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

DDIT(It) 1(2) vs. Clough Projects International Pty. Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals filed by revenue and CO’s filed by the assessee are treated as dismissed

ITA 2952/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 2952/Mum/2010 & Cross Objection No. 09/Mum/2011 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2006-07) & आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 4930/Mum/2014 & Cross Objection No. 61/Mum/2016 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) & आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 4931/Mum/2014 & Cross Objection No. 62/Mum/2016 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09)

For Appellant: Shri PurushottamFor Respondent: Shri Nishant Thakkar
Section 143(3)Section 44ASection 44B

…offshore supply which was brought to tax by the AO u/s 44BB, the Ld. CIT(A) strongly relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ishikawajima Harima Heavy Industries Co. Ltd. (288 ITR 408) (SC) and Hyundai Heavy Industries Co. Ltd. (2007) (291 ITR 482) (SC) and held that the same is to be excluded from taxability u/s 44BB because the same cannot be said to be attributable under Article 7(1) of India Australia DTAA. Thus, he directed the AO to include the income from Indian operations only to be taxed @ 10% u/s 44BB. 6 I.T.A. No. 2952/Mum/2010 & Others CO No. 09/Mum/2011 & Others M/s Clough Pr…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. D.D. Resorts Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 3160/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Mar 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

For Appellant: Shri Sahil Aggarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Manu Chaurasiya, Sr. DR
Section 145

…f section 145 of the Act and further drew support from the Notification No. 9949 dated 25.01.1996. 7. After considering the facts and submissions and after considering the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hyundai Heavy Industries Co. Ltd 291 ITR 482 and Bilahari Investment Pvt Ltd 299 ITR 1, the ld. CIT(A) observed as under: “I have carefully considered the submissions of the appellant and the assessment order. In this case the only ground on which the addition has been made is the adoption of the Percentage Completion Method (PCM) by the AO against the Completed Contract Method (CCM) foll…

Hyundai Motor India Limited, Kancheepuram vs. DCIT Ltu-II, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1836/CHNY/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Feb 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Sriram Seshadri, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Abani Kanta Nayak, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी महावीर "संह, उपा"य" एवं "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 1836/CHNY/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2008-09 M/s. Hyundai Motor India The DCIT, Limited, v. Large Taxpayer Unit – II, Plot No.H-1, Sipcot Industrial Park, Chennai – 34. Irungattukottai, Sriperumbudur Taluk, Kancheepuram District – 602 117. PAN: AAACH 2364M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant by : Shr…

Itochu Corporation, Japan vs. ACIT (International Taxation), Circle-2(1)(1), New Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7615/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Nov 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Pandaa N D Ms. Suchitra Kamblei.T.A. No. 360/Del/2017 (A.Y. 2013-14) A N D I.T.A. No. 7615/Del/2018 (A.Y. 2015-16) (Through Video Conferencing) Itochu Corporation, Acit, 5–1, Kita-Aoyama, Vs. (International Taxation) 2–Chome, Minato-Ku Circle 2(1)(1), Tokyo 107-8077, Japan. New Delhi. Pan: Aabci5567L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv &For Respondent: Shri Satpal Gulati [CIT]–DR

…ch does not require any agent involvement in India. The Ld. AR relied upon the following decisions in relation to non-taxability of offshore supplies in India: a) Ishikawajima-Harima Heavy Industries Ltd. (288 ITR 408) SC b) Hyundai Heavy Industries Co. Ltd. (291 ITR 482) SC c) Linde AG, Linde Engineering Division (44 Taxmann 244) Del. HC (appeal withdrawn by the Revenue Department in the Supreme Court) d) Hyosung Corporation (AAR) (314 ITR 343) f) LG Cable (Delhi ITAT) (ITA No. 5280/Del/2011) Thus, the Ld. AR submitted that no portion of direct sales can be brought to tax in India either on account of alleged P…

Itochu Corporation, Japan vs. DCIT (International Taxation), New Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 360/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Nov 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Pandaa N D Ms. Suchitra Kamblei.T.A. No. 360/Del/2017 (A.Y. 2013-14) A N D I.T.A. No. 7615/Del/2018 (A.Y. 2015-16) (Through Video Conferencing) Itochu Corporation, Acit, 5–1, Kita-Aoyama, Vs. (International Taxation) 2–Chome, Minato-Ku Circle 2(1)(1), Tokyo 107-8077, Japan. New Delhi. Pan: Aabci5567L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv &For Respondent: Shri Satpal Gulati [CIT]–DR

…ch does not require any agent involvement in India. The Ld. AR relied upon the following decisions in relation to non-taxability of offshore supplies in India: a) Ishikawajima-Harima Heavy Industries Ltd. (288 ITR 408) SC b) Hyundai Heavy Industries Co. Ltd. (291 ITR 482) SC c) Linde AG, Linde Engineering Division (44 Taxmann 244) Del. HC (appeal withdrawn by the Revenue Department in the Supreme Court) d) Hyosung Corporation (AAR) (314 ITR 343) f) LG Cable (Delhi ITAT) (ITA No. 5280/Del/2011) Thus, the Ld. AR submitted that no portion of direct sales can be brought to tax in India either on account of alleged P…

Mi Overseas Ltd., Mumbai vs. ADIT, Dehradun

In the result ITA number 5584/Del/2013 filed by the assessee for assessment year

ITA 5584/DEL/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun08 Jun 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Thakur Singh Mapwal, JCIT DR
Section 263Section 44BSection 9

…oods passes outside India therefore income of the supply of material is not taxable in India. He referred to the decision of the honourable Supreme Court in case of Ishikawajima Harima heavy industries Ltd 288 ITR 408 (SC), CIT versus Hyundai heavy industries 291 ITR 482 (SC) DIT versus Ericsson AB 343 ITR 470 (Delhi), DIT versus Nokia networks OY 358 ITR 259 (Delhi), DIT versus LG Cable Ltd ITA 703 of 2009 dated 24/12/2010 (Delhi), DIT versus Xelo Pty Ltd 203 taxman 475 (Bombay), LS cable Ltd 331 ITR 35 (AR), Deepak Cable India Ltd 337 ITR 127, ION Geophysical Corporation versus DCIT 72 taxmann.com 298 and Natio…

Mi Overseas Ltd., Mumbai vs. ADIT, Dehradun

In the result ITA number 5584/Del/2013 filed by the assessee for assessment year

ITA 5583/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun08 Jun 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Thakur Singh Mapwal, JCIT DR
Section 263Section 44BSection 9

…oods passes outside India therefore income of the supply of material is not taxable in India. He referred to the decision of the honourable Supreme Court in case of Ishikawajima Harima heavy industries Ltd 288 ITR 408 (SC), CIT versus Hyundai heavy industries 291 ITR 482 (SC) DIT versus Ericsson AB 343 ITR 470 (Delhi), DIT versus Nokia networks OY 358 ITR 259 (Delhi), DIT versus LG Cable Ltd ITA 703 of 2009 dated 24/12/2010 (Delhi), DIT versus Xelo Pty Ltd 203 taxman 475 (Bombay), LS cable Ltd 331 ITR 35 (AR), Deepak Cable India Ltd 337 ITR 127, ION Geophysical Corporation versus DCIT 72 taxmann.com 298 and Natio…

ADIT (International Taxation), Dehradun vs. M/S. M.I, Overseas Ltd., Mumbai

In the result ITA number 5584/Del/2013 filed by the assessee for assessment year

ITA 5565/DEL/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun08 Jun 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Thakur Singh Mapwal, JCIT DR
Section 263Section 44BSection 9

…oods passes outside India therefore income of the supply of material is not taxable in India. He referred to the decision of the honourable Supreme Court in case of Ishikawajima Harima heavy industries Ltd 288 ITR 408 (SC), CIT versus Hyundai heavy industries 291 ITR 482 (SC) DIT versus Ericsson AB 343 ITR 470 (Delhi), DIT versus Nokia networks OY 358 ITR 259 (Delhi), DIT versus LG Cable Ltd ITA 703 of 2009 dated 24/12/2010 (Delhi), DIT versus Xelo Pty Ltd 203 taxman 475 (Bombay), LS cable Ltd 331 ITR 35 (AR), Deepak Cable India Ltd 337 ITR 127, ION Geophysical Corporation versus DCIT 72 taxmann.com 298 and Natio…

ADIT (International Taxation), Dehradun vs. M/S. M.I, Overseas Ltd., Mumbai

In the result ITA number 5584/Del/2013 filed by the assessee for assessment year

ITA 5564/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun08 Jun 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Thakur Singh Mapwal, JCIT DR
Section 263Section 44BSection 9

…oods passes outside India therefore income of the supply of material is not taxable in India. He referred to the decision of the honourable Supreme Court in case of Ishikawajima Harima heavy industries Ltd 288 ITR 408 (SC), CIT versus Hyundai heavy industries 291 ITR 482 (SC) DIT versus Ericsson AB 343 ITR 470 (Delhi), DIT versus Nokia networks OY 358 ITR 259 (Delhi), DIT versus LG Cable Ltd ITA 703 of 2009 dated 24/12/2010 (Delhi), DIT versus Xelo Pty Ltd 203 taxman 475 (Bombay), LS cable Ltd 331 ITR 35 (AR), Deepak Cable India Ltd 337 ITR 127, ION Geophysical Corporation versus DCIT 72 taxmann.com 298 and Natio…

ADIT, Dehradun vs. M/S. M.I. Overseas Ltd., Noida

In the result ITA number 5584/Del/2013 filed by the assessee for assessment year

ITA 3045/DEL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun08 Jun 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Thakur Singh Mapwal, JCIT DR
Section 263Section 44BSection 9

…oods passes outside India therefore income of the supply of material is not taxable in India. He referred to the decision of the honourable Supreme Court in case of Ishikawajima Harima heavy industries Ltd 288 ITR 408 (SC), CIT versus Hyundai heavy industries 291 ITR 482 (SC) DIT versus Ericsson AB 343 ITR 470 (Delhi), DIT versus Nokia networks OY 358 ITR 259 (Delhi), DIT versus LG Cable Ltd ITA 703 of 2009 dated 24/12/2010 (Delhi), DIT versus Xelo Pty Ltd 203 taxman 475 (Bombay), LS cable Ltd 331 ITR 35 (AR), Deepak Cable India Ltd 337 ITR 127, ION Geophysical Corporation versus DCIT 72 taxmann.com 298 and Natio…

Mi Overseas Ltd., Mumbai vs. ADIT, Dehradun

In the result ITA number 5584/Del/2013 filed by the assessee for assessment year

ITA 2956/DEL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun08 Jun 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Thakur Singh Mapwal, JCIT DR
Section 263Section 44BSection 9

…oods passes outside India therefore income of the supply of material is not taxable in India. He referred to the decision of the honourable Supreme Court in case of Ishikawajima Harima heavy industries Ltd 288 ITR 408 (SC), CIT versus Hyundai heavy industries 291 ITR 482 (SC) DIT versus Ericsson AB 343 ITR 470 (Delhi), DIT versus Nokia networks OY 358 ITR 259 (Delhi), DIT versus LG Cable Ltd ITA 703 of 2009 dated 24/12/2010 (Delhi), DIT versus Xelo Pty Ltd 203 taxman 475 (Bombay), LS cable Ltd 331 ITR 35 (AR), Deepak Cable India Ltd 337 ITR 127, ION Geophysical Corporation versus DCIT 72 taxmann.com 298 and Natio…

Mi Overseas Ltd., New Delhi vs. ADIT, Dehradun

In the result ITA number 5584/Del/2013 filed by the assessee for assessment year

ITA 3072/DEL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun08 Jun 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Thakur Singh Mapwal, JCIT DR
Section 263Section 44BSection 9

…oods passes outside India therefore income of the supply of material is not taxable in India. He referred to the decision of the honourable Supreme Court in case of Ishikawajima Harima heavy industries Ltd 288 ITR 408 (SC), CIT versus Hyundai heavy industries 291 ITR 482 (SC) DIT versus Ericsson AB 343 ITR 470 (Delhi), DIT versus Nokia networks OY 358 ITR 259 (Delhi), DIT versus LG Cable Ltd ITA 703 of 2009 dated 24/12/2010 (Delhi), DIT versus Xelo Pty Ltd 203 taxman 475 (Bombay), LS cable Ltd 331 ITR 35 (AR), Deepak Cable India Ltd 337 ITR 127, ION Geophysical Corporation versus DCIT 72 taxmann.com 298 and Natio…

Morgan Stanley Mauritius Company Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT (It) Range 3 (2)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 7388/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 May 2021AY 2015-16
Section 143(3)

…- India, i.e. PE of the UK-based foreign company, but the foreign company itself, and the place of management of the UK-based company is obviously United Kingdom. As observed by Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the case of CIT Vs Hyundai Heavy Industries Ltd [(2007) 291 ITR 482 (SC)], “it is clear that under the Act, a taxable unit is a foreign company and not its branch or PE in India”. Clearly, therefore, the observations of the DRP so far as the basis of taxability, i.e. “assessed to tax on account of place of management” is incorrect. 15. Shri Singh, learned Commissioner (DR), however, seeks to justify the stand so…

Director of Income Tax -II New Delhi vs. M/S Samsung Heavy Industries Co. Ltd

C.A. No.-012183-012183 - 2016Supreme Court22 Jul 2020

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN

…1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 12183 OF 2016 DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX-II (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) NEW DELHI & ANR. …Appellants Versus M/S SAMSUNG HEAVY INDUSTRIES CO. LTD. ...Respondent J U D G M E N T R.F. Nariman, J. 1. This appeal by the Department revisits the question as to the taxability of income attributable to a “permanent establishment” set up in a fixed place in India, arising from the ‘Agreement for avoidance of double taxation of income and the prevention of fiscal eva…

DCIT-1(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Kumar Properties Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed, and appeal of the Assessing Officer is dismissed

ITA 605/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jul 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 605/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Dcit 1(2)(1), M/S Kumar Properties Pvt. R. No. 535, Ltd. बिधम/ Aayakarbhavan, 21, Woundboy Road, M. K. Road, Hazarimalsomani Marg, Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Opp-Mumbai Gymkhana, Fort, Mubmai-400 001 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan No. Aabck8464E (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : &

For Appellant: ShriDrop Singh MeenaFor Respondent: ShriRajanVora/Shri
Section 143Section 143(2)Section 145(1)

…Vs. Manish Build Well Pvt Ltd Vs. CIT (2011) 245 CTR 397 (Del) [enclosed at page no 172 to 185 of the Paper book], wherein the Hon'ble Delhi High court, following the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT Vs. Hyundai Heavy Industries Co Ltd (2007) 291 ITR 482 and in case of CIT v. Bilahari Investment (P.) Ltd. [2008] 299 ITR 1 , has held that the project completion method is one of the recognized methods of accounting and it cannot be said that the project completion method followed by the assessee would result in deferment of the payment of the taxes which are to be assessed annually under the IT Act…

DCIT(It)-2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Cameron Australasia Pty Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 1400/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2020AY 2015-16
For Respondent: March 12th, 2020
Section 143(3)Section 44B

…the assessee from each separate, independent and divisible work under the ONGC contract was required to be evaluated independently, had also taken support of the judgment of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Hyundai Heavy Companies Ltd. (2007) 291 ITR 482 (SC). In the aforementioned case, the assessee a Korean company had entered into a composite contract having two types of operations viz. (i) one being fabrication in Korea; and (ii) the other consisting of installation in India. The Hon‟ble Apex court in the backdrop of the facts involved in Cameron Australasia PTY LTD. Page 5 of 9 the said case…

Audi Ag, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 1(1)(2), Mumbai

The appeal is hereby allowed

ITA 6363/MUM/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Mar 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singhaudi Ag Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, C/O Srbc & Associates Llp, (International Taxation)-1(1)(2), 14Th Floor, The Ruby, Room No. 117, 1St Floor, Senapati Bapat Marg, Vs. Scindia House, Ballard Estate, Dadar (West), Mumbai – 400 028 Mumbai- 400 038 Maharashtra.

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Singh, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 9

…s/car by assessee to Volkswagon Group Sales outside India cannot be held taxable in India. Therefore, any income which can be further said to be attributed in India. The ld. AR of the assessee further relied upon the decision of Hyundai Heavy Industries Ltd. [291 ITR 482 (SC)], Linde AG [W.P. No. 3914/2012 (Del. High Court), decision of Mumbai Tribunal in Daimler Chrysler AG (52 SOT 93). 8. On the ground of fixed place PE, the ld. AR submits that to constitute the fixed place PE, the law has been settled by Hon’ble Supreme Court in ACIT Vs E-Funds IT Solution Inc [(2017) 100 CCH 0048 I SCC], wherein it is held th…

M/S. Voith Paper Gmbh, New Delhi vs. DDIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1077/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri K.N. Charyassessment Year: 2010-11

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 5(2)Section 9

…n the following cases where, on similar facts, it has been held that consideration for supply of plant and equipment, from outside India, was not liable to tax in India. (i) Commissioner of Income Tax and Another Vs. Hyundai Heavy Industries Company Limited (291 ITR 482 SC); (ii) Ishikawajima - Harima Heavy Industries Ltd. - Vs. Director of Income Tax, Mumbai (228 ITR 408 SC). (iii) Director of Income Tax, New Delhi Vs. LG Cables Ltd.[2011] 197 Taxman 51 (Delhi) (l) That the learned A.O. / DRP has wrongly and without any basis erred in holding that the assessee has a business connection and ‘Fixed Place of b…

DDIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Mitsui and Co. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the two appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 794/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2020AY 2008-09

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

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.K. Dhall, CIT, DR
Section 44B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : E : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.2801 & 4329/Del/2011 Assessment Years : 2006-07 & 2007-08 Assessment Year : 2008-09 DDIT, Vs Mitsui & Co. Ltd., Plot No.D-1, 4th Floor, Circle-3(1), International Taxation, Salcon Ras Vilas, New Delhi. District Centre, Saket, New Delhi. PAN: AAACM5469Q ITA Nos.4367/Del/2011 Assessment Year : 2007-08 Assessment Year : 2008-09 Mitsui & Co. Ltd., Vs. DDIT, Plot No.D-1, 4th Floor, Circle-3(1), Salcon Ras Vilas, International Taxation, District Centre, Saket, New De…

M/S. Mitsui & Co. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DDIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the two appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 4367/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2020AY 2007-08

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

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.K. Dhall, CIT, DR
Section 44B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : E : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.2801 & 4329/Del/2011 Assessment Years : 2006-07 & 2007-08 Assessment Year : 2008-09 DDIT, Vs Mitsui & Co. Ltd., Plot No.D-1, 4th Floor, Circle-3(1), International Taxation, Salcon Ras Vilas, New Delhi. District Centre, Saket, New Delhi. PAN: AAACM5469Q ITA Nos.4367/Del/2011 Assessment Year : 2007-08 Assessment Year : 2008-09 Mitsui & Co. Ltd., Vs. DDIT, Plot No.D-1, 4th Floor, Circle-3(1), Salcon Ras Vilas, International Taxation, District Centre, Saket, New De…