What is CIT v. Indo Saudi Services (Travel) (P.) Ltd. authority for?

Disallowance of commission paid to a sister concern under Section 40A(2) is not justified if the Revenue cannot demonstrate tax evasion and the sister concern also pays tax at a higher rate.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Indo Saudi Services (Travel) (P.) Ltd.?

20 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Indo Saudi Services (Travel) (P.) Ltd. (219 CTR 562), spanning 2016 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Indo Saudi Services (Travel) (P.) Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(2), Section 143(3), Section 263, Section 40A(2)(b), Section 250, Section 143(3) r.w.s. 263.

CIT v. Indo Saudi Services (Travel) (P.) Ltd. (219 CTR 562)

KPMG ADVISORY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CIRCLE-6(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5396/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeita No. 5395/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2012-13) Ita No. 5393/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2015-16) M/S. Kpmg Advisory Services Dcit, Circle – 6(1)(2), Private Limited Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Churchgate, 2Nd Floor, Block T2 (B Wing), Mumbai Vs. Lodha Excelus, Apollo Mills Compound, N. M. Joshi Marg, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Jain a/w Shri Siddhesh Chaugule &For Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 40A(2)(b)Section 40A(2)(h)

…curring such expenditure the same would be commonly undertaken by the company and different sister concern would undertake a portion of such expenditure. The Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of the CIT vs Indo Saudi Services (Travel) Pvt. Ltd. (2008) 219 CTR 562 (Bombay) that regarding excessive of unreasonable payment u/s 40A(2) of the Act held that Revenue was not in a position to point out how assessee evaded payment of tax by alleged payment of higher commission to its sister concern since sister concern was also paying tax at higher rate disallowance of alleged commission paid to sister concern was…

KPMG ADVISORY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CIRCLE-6(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5395/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeita No. 5395/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2012-13) Ita No. 5393/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2015-16) M/S. Kpmg Advisory Services Dcit, Circle – 6(1)(2), Private Limited Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Churchgate, 2Nd Floor, Block T2 (B Wing), Mumbai Vs. Lodha Excelus, Apollo Mills Compound, N. M. Joshi Marg, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Jain a/w Shri Siddhesh Chaugule &For Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 40A(2)(b)Section 40A(2)(h)

…curring such expenditure the same would be commonly undertaken by the company and different sister concern would undertake a portion of such expenditure. The Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of the CIT vs Indo Saudi Services (Travel) Pvt. Ltd. (2008) 219 CTR 562 (Bombay) that regarding excessive of unreasonable payment u/s 40A(2) of the Act held that Revenue was not in a position to point out how assessee evaded payment of tax by alleged payment of higher commission to its sister concern since sister concern was also paying tax at higher rate disallowance of alleged commission paid to sister concern was…

KPMG ADVISORY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CIRCLE-6(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5394/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeita No. 5395/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2012-13) Ita No. 5393/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2015-16) M/S. Kpmg Advisory Services Dcit, Circle – 6(1)(2), Private Limited Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Churchgate, 2Nd Floor, Block T2 (B Wing), Mumbai Vs. Lodha Excelus, Apollo Mills Compound, N. M. Joshi Marg, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Jain a/w Shri Siddhesh Chaugule &For Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 40A(2)(b)Section 40A(2)(h)

…curring such expenditure the same would be commonly undertaken by the company and different sister concern would undertake a portion of such expenditure. The Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of the CIT vs Indo Saudi Services (Travel) Pvt. Ltd. (2008) 219 CTR 562 (Bombay) that regarding excessive of unreasonable payment u/s 40A(2) of the Act held that Revenue was not in a position to point out how assessee evaded payment of tax by alleged payment of higher commission to its sister concern since sister concern was also paying tax at higher rate disallowance of alleged commission paid to sister concern was…

KPMG ADVISORY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CIRCLE-6(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5393/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeita No. 5395/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2012-13) Ita No. 5393/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2015-16) M/S. Kpmg Advisory Services Dcit, Circle – 6(1)(2), Private Limited Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Churchgate, 2Nd Floor, Block T2 (B Wing), Mumbai Vs. Lodha Excelus, Apollo Mills Compound, N. M. Joshi Marg, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Jain a/w Shri Siddhesh Chaugule &For Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 40A(2)(b)Section 40A(2)(h)

…curring such expenditure the same would be commonly undertaken by the company and different sister concern would undertake a portion of such expenditure. The Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of the CIT vs Indo Saudi Services (Travel) Pvt. Ltd. (2008) 219 CTR 562 (Bombay) that regarding excessive of unreasonable payment u/s 40A(2) of the Act held that Revenue was not in a position to point out how assessee evaded payment of tax by alleged payment of higher commission to its sister concern since sister concern was also paying tax at higher rate disallowance of alleged commission paid to sister concern was…

KPMG ADVISORY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CIRCLE-6(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5392/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeita No. 5395/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2012-13) Ita No. 5393/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2015-16) M/S. Kpmg Advisory Services Dcit, Circle – 6(1)(2), Private Limited Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Churchgate, 2Nd Floor, Block T2 (B Wing), Mumbai Vs. Lodha Excelus, Apollo Mills Compound, N. M. Joshi Marg, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Jain a/w Shri Siddhesh Chaugule &For Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 40A(2)(b)Section 40A(2)(h)

…curring such expenditure the same would be commonly undertaken by the company and different sister concern would undertake a portion of such expenditure. The Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of the CIT vs Indo Saudi Services (Travel) Pvt. Ltd. (2008) 219 CTR 562 (Bombay) that regarding excessive of unreasonable payment u/s 40A(2) of the Act held that Revenue was not in a position to point out how assessee evaded payment of tax by alleged payment of higher commission to its sister concern since sister concern was also paying tax at higher rate disallowance of alleged commission paid to sister concern was…

SHANTINIKETAN PROPERTIES LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-23(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed on ground no

ITA 2301/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri K.M. Gupta, Adv

Section 244A

…come. 4. The ld. counsel submitted that in view of various judgments and orders of co- ordinate benches of Tribunal and Hon’ble High Court including judgments of Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT vs. Indo Saudi Services (Travel) Pvt. Ltd. (2008) 219 CTR 562 (Bom.) and in the case of CIT vs V S Dempo & Co. P. Ltd. (2011) 196 TAXMAN 193 (Bom.) it has been held that where the revenue was not in a position to point out how the assessee evaded payment of tax by alleged payment of higher commission or interest to its sister concern, since the sister concern was also paying tax at higher rate, disallowance…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 4(1), RAIPUR vs. M/S SUPER IRON AND STEEL PVT LTD.,, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed and Cross objection of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 261/RPR/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur31 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.261/Rpr/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Acit-4(1), Raipur Vs M/S Super Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd., Pritpal Farm House, Vip Road, Raipur(C.G.) Pan No. : Aaics 2579 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) & Cross Objection No.13/Rpr/2017 (Arising Out Of Ita No.261/Rpr/2017) ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2010-2011) M/S Super Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit-4(1), Raipur Pritpal Farm House, Vip Road, Raipur(C.G.) Pan No. : Aaics 2579 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Nikhilesh Begani, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.N.Singh, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 40Section 40A(2)(b)Section 68

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, रायपुर "यायपीठ, रायपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR "ी र"वश सूद, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी अ"ण खोड़"पया, लेखा सद"य के सम" । BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.261/RPR/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2010-2011) ACIT-4(1), Raipur Vs M/s Super Iron and Steel Pvt. Ltd., Pritpal Farm House, VIP Road, Raipur(C.G.) PAN No. : AAICS 2579 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) AND Cross Objection No.13/RPR/2017 (Arising out of ITA No.261/RPR/2017) ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2010-2011) M/s Super Iron and Steel Pvt. Ltd., Vs ACI…

INDICARE HOSPITAL PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASSTT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 805/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleindicare Hospital Pvt. Ltd., V. Acit – 1 Flat No. 6, 3Rd Floor 6Th Floor, Ashar I.T. Park Hosbanoo Mansion, Gokhale Road Road No. 16Z Near Bpl Gallery, Naupada Wagle Industrial Estate Thane - 400062 Thane, Mumbai - 400604 Pan: Aabci2433F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Dharan Gandhi Department Represented By : Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash

Section 143(2)Section 37Section 40A

…icable to the assessee. Further, it was submitted that assessee has continually incurring loss. Therefore, there is absolutely no loss to the revenue. In this regard he relied on the following case laws: - (i). CIT v. Indo Saudi Services (Travel) (P.) Ltd., [219 CTR 562 (Bombay)] (ii). CIT v. V.S. Dempo & Co. (P.) Ltd., [244 CTR 102 (Bombay)] 9. Further, he submitted that Assessing Officer has adopted the report submitted by the Circle Inspector, however, he has not shared the above report with the assessee. Ld. AR submitted that Assessing Officer cannot adopt the rates submitted by the Circle Inspector without…

ADIENT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 14,, PUNE

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 512/PUN/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti SatheFor Respondent: Shri S.P. Walimbe

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 40A(2)(a)Section 40A(2)(b)

…och) considered that remuneration decided on prescribed rate of turnover is allowable and decided the issue in favour of appellant. The ITAT considered the decision of the Bombay High Court in case of CIT vs. Indo Saudi Services (Travel) (P.) Ltd. reported in 219 CTR 562 and concluded that there was no evasion of taxes by the assessee in making payment to TACO. There was observation in A.Y. 2006-07 that no services have been reported by TACO. The ITAT relying on the decision of the Dressers-Rand India (P.) td. Vs. Addl. CIT reported in 13 taxmann.com 82 (Mum) decided the issue in favour of the appellant. The ITAT…

ADIENT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 14,, PUNE

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 1507/PUN/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti SatheFor Respondent: Shri S.P. Walimbe

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 40A(2)(a)Section 40A(2)(b)

…och) considered that remuneration decided on prescribed rate of turnover is allowable and decided the issue in favour of appellant. The ITAT considered the decision of the Bombay High Court in case of CIT vs. Indo Saudi Services (Travel) (P.) Ltd. reported in 219 CTR 562 and concluded that there was no evasion of taxes by the assessee in making payment to TACO. There was observation in A.Y. 2006-07 that no services have been reported by TACO. The ITAT relying on the decision of the Dressers-Rand India (P.) td. Vs. Addl. CIT reported in 13 taxmann.com 82 (Mum) decided the issue in favour of the appellant. The ITAT…

ADIENT INDIA PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -7,, PUNE

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 1506/PUN/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti SatheFor Respondent: Shri S.P. Walimbe

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 40A(2)(a)Section 40A(2)(b)

…och) considered that remuneration decided on prescribed rate of turnover is allowable and decided the issue in favour of appellant. The ITAT considered the decision of the Bombay High Court in case of CIT vs. Indo Saudi Services (Travel) (P.) Ltd. reported in 219 CTR 562 and concluded that there was no evasion of taxes by the assessee in making payment to TACO. There was observation in A.Y. 2006-07 that no services have been reported by TACO. The ITAT relying on the decision of the Dressers-Rand India (P.) td. Vs. Addl. CIT reported in 13 taxmann.com 82 (Mum) decided the issue in favour of the appellant. The ITAT…

UNIVERSAL BUILDRISE PRIVATE LIMITED (EARLIER KNOWN AS UNIVERSAL BOOK DISTRIBUTORS PVT. LTD.),NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-27(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 9296/DEL/2019[ 2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Sept 2021

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda

For Appellant: Shri Arvind Kishore Nair, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.K. Gupta, Sr. D.R

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 24

…epresentatives, the limited issue which arises is against the disallowance of the managerial remuneration paid to the Managing Director Sh. Anshul Chawla of Rs.36 Lacs. 5. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Indo Saudi Services (Travel) (P.) Ltd. (2008) 219 CTR 562 (Bom) had laid down the proposition that where the assessee and its subsidiary were in the same tax bracket and paid same rate of tax, there was no question of diversion of funds by paying higher rate to 10 ITA.No.9296/Del./2019 M/s. Universal Buildrise Private Limited, New Delhi. the subsidiary company and hence no disallowance under section 40…

UNIVERSAL DISTRIBUTORS PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-27(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6505/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Mar 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Ms. Aditi Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. R.K. Gupta, Sr. DR

Section 115J

…epresentatives, the limited issue which arises is against the disallowance of the managerial remuneration paid to the Managing Director Sh. Anshul Chawla of Rs. 36 Lacs. 5. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Indo Saudi Services (Travel) (P.) Ltd. (2008) 219 CTR 562 (Bom) had laid down the proposition that where the assessee and its 7 ITA-6505//Del/2018 subsidiary were in the same tax bracket and paid same rate of tax, there was no question of diversion of funds by paying higher rate to the subsidiary company and hence no disallowance under section 40(A)(2) of the Act. Applying the said proposition to the f…

UNIVERSAL BUILDRISE LLP,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-27(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 172/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowlaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.172/Del/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year 2012-13

For Appellant: Ms. Aditi Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 40

…sentatives, the limited issue which arises is against the disallowance of the managerial remuneration paid to the Managing Director Sh. Anshul Chawla of Rs. 36 Lacs. 5. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Indo Saudi Services (Travel) (P.) Ltd. (2008) 219 CTR 562 (Bom) had laid down the proposition that where the assessee and its subsidiary were in the same tax bracket and paid same rate of tax, there was no question of diversion of funds by paying higher rate to the subsidiary company and hence no disallowance 2 under section 40(A)(2) of the Act. Applying the said proposition to the facts of the case…

DY.CIT-3(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S.MARSHALL PRODUCE BROKERS CO.PVT.LTD.,, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7177/MUM/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri S.E. Dastur, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Jothilakshmi Nayak, D.R

Section 38(2)Section 38(3)

…e were at maximum rate and therefore there is no question of tax evasion and the Ld. CIT(A) has passed a very reasoned order. The Ld. A.R. also relied on the order of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Indo South Services Travel Pvt. Ltd. (2008) 219 CTR 562 (Bom.) wherein the Hon’ble Bombay High Court has held that where the sister concern was paying tax at a higher rate then the disallowance of excessive commission paid to sister concern was not justified as 12 M/s. Marshall Produce Brokers Company Pvt. Ltd. there was no tax evasion. The said decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court has been follo…

DCIT CEN CIR 29, MUMBAI vs. YASH RAJ FILMS P. LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 3345/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jan 2017AY 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka-ARFor Respondent: Ms. Vidisha Kalra -DR

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 68

…in capacity as a director as per her calibre, knowledge and experience.The assessee produced various documents, before the FAA,to prove that PC had rendered services to the company. The assessee relied upon the cases of Indo Saudi Services (Travel) (P.) Ltd. (219 CTR 562). After considering the available material,the FAA held that the AO could not substitute himself in the shoes of head of HRD division of the company,that he was authorised by law to go into the question whether the expenditure claimed was wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business or not,that he had noticed from the survey proceedings and…

YASH RAJ FILMS PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. A.C.I.T. CENTRAL CIRCLE 29, MUMBAI

ITA 2597/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jan 2017AY 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka-ARFor Respondent: Ms. Vidisha Kalra -DR

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 68

…in capacity as a director as per her calibre, knowledge and experience.The assessee produced various documents, before the FAA,to prove that PC had rendered services to the company. The assessee relied upon the cases of Indo Saudi Services (Travel) (P.) Ltd. (219 CTR 562). After considering the available material,the FAA held that the AO could not substitute himself in the shoes of head of HRD division of the company,that he was authorised by law to go into the question whether the expenditure claimed was wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business or not,that he had noticed from the survey proceedings and…

HIND AIRLINK PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 2634/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Aug 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddyay: 2011-12 Hind Airlink P.Ltd. Vs. Dy.Cit, Circle 12(1) A -1, Okhla Industrial Area New Delhi Phase I, New Delhi 110 020

For Appellant: Sh. M.P.Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: None (Adjournment Application rejected)

Section 40Section 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(b)

…rt has laid down that fair market value of a transaction between associate domestic Enterprises can be determined by using Transfer Pricing Methodologies and study. 12.6. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Indo Saudi Services (P) Ltd. (2009) 219 CTR 562 Bombay at para 4 held as follows. “4. We have heard the learned advocates appearing for both sides. W7e have also perused the order passed by the Tribunal dated 21st Oct., 1999 which is impugned by the Revenue in the present appeals. We find that the following facts were established before the Tribunal and the same have been accepted by the Reven…

. AMSERVE CONSULTANTS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADIT, NEW DELHI

In the result both the appeals of the assesses are allowed

ITA 6059/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri J. Sudhakar Reddyay: 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. C.S.Agarwal, Sr.AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Ravi Jain, CIT, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(b)

…ned by using Transfer Pricing Methodologies and study. ITA 6059/Del/2013 M/s Amserve Consultants Ltd. ITA 6090/Del/13 M/s Amsure Insurance Agency Ltd. A.Y. 2009-10 12.6. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Indo Saudi Services (P) Ltd. (2009) 219 CTR 562 Bombay at para 4 held as follows. “4. We have heard the learned advocates appearing for both sides. W7e have also perused the order passed by the Tribunal dated 21st Oct., 1999 which is impugned by the Revenue in the present appeals. We find that the following facts were established before the Tribunal and the same have been accepted by the Reve…

CONCORD ENVIRO SYSTEMS (P ) LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CC 10, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee company in ITA N0

ITA 3917/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3917/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Concord Enviro Systems (Pvt) Acit -10, बनाम/ Ltd., 101, Hdil Tower, Aayakar Bhavan, V. Anant Kanekar Marg, Annex. M.K. Marg, Bandra East, Mumbai – 400 020. Mumbai-400051 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaacc8962C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Dr. S. Pandian,DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 40A(2)(b)

…ctors. Thus, the ld. Counsel prayed that these additional evidences submitted before the learned CIT(A) should be admitted. The ld. Counsel relied on the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Indo Saudi Services (Travel) (P.) Ltd. [2008] 219 CTR 562 (Bom) and also the CBDT Circular No. 6-P dated 06-07-1968. It is also the averment of the learned counsel for the assessee that the AO has not given sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee company. The learned counsel submitted that the taxes were duly paid by the Directors on the total remuneration including commission on turnover…

CIT v. Indo Saudi Services (Travel) (P.) Ltd.

What is CIT v. Indo Saudi Services (Travel) (P.) Ltd. authority for?

Also referred to as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Indo Saudi Services (Travel) (P.) Ltd.

KPMG ADVISORY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CIRCLE-6(1)(2), MUMBAI

KPMG ADVISORY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CIRCLE-6(1)(2), MUMBAI

KPMG ADVISORY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CIRCLE-6(1)(2), MUMBAI

KPMG ADVISORY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CIRCLE-6(1)(2), MUMBAI

KPMG ADVISORY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CIRCLE-6(1)(2), MUMBAI

SHANTINIKETAN PROPERTIES LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-23(1), NEW DELHI

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 4(1), RAIPUR vs. M/S SUPER IRON AND STEEL PVT LTD.,, RAIPUR

INDICARE HOSPITAL PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASSTT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, MUMBAI

ADIENT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 14,, PUNE

ADIENT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 14,, PUNE

ADIENT INDIA PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -7,, PUNE

UNIVERSAL BUILDRISE PRIVATE LIMITED (EARLIER KNOWN AS UNIVERSAL BOOK DISTRIBUTORS PVT. LTD.),NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-27(1), NEW DELHI

UNIVERSAL DISTRIBUTORS PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-27(1), NEW DELHI

UNIVERSAL BUILDRISE LLP,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-27(1), NEW DELHI

DY.CIT-3(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S.MARSHALL PRODUCE BROKERS CO.PVT.LTD.,, MUMBAI

DCIT CEN CIR 29, MUMBAI vs. YASH RAJ FILMS P. LTD, MUMBAI

YASH RAJ FILMS PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. A.C.I.T. CENTRAL CIRCLE 29, MUMBAI

HIND AIRLINK PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

. AMSERVE CONSULTANTS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADIT, NEW DELHI

CONCORD ENVIRO SYSTEMS (P ) LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CC 10, MUMBAI