CIT v. Kotak Securities Ltd.

383 ITR 1Supreme Court of India2016#451 most cited

What is CIT v. Kotak Securities Ltd. authority for?

Fees for technical services under Section 9(1)(vii) can include payments for fully automated services even without direct human interface, as modern technological developments blur the specific human element in such processes.

203

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,244 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Kotak Securities Ltd. · section 9(1)(vii) · fees for technical services · FTS · automated services · human interface · section 40(a)(ia) disallowance · make available condition · DTAA · software

Also reported as

67 Taxmann.com 356239 Taxmann 139

Sections most often in play

Section 9(1)(vii)Section 143(3)Section 40(a)(ia)Section 194JSection 144C(3)Section 40(a)(i)Section 37Section 115JB
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 194jsection 9(1)(vii)section 194hsection 40a(ia)fees for technical servicesdisallowance under section 40(a)(ia)section 92ca(1)section 9(1)section 90(2)section 9(1)(vi)section 194tested party

Judgments citing CIT v. Kotak Securities Ltd.

Action Financial Services India Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO (TDS)1(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of assessee for both the year under consideration are allowed

ITA 7076/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jul 2016AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Rahul K. HakaniFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar
Section 115JSection 194JSection 201(1)

…was reversed and it was held that transaction tax are not liable for deduction of tax u/s.115J. 6. We have considered rival contentions and found that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kotak Securities Ltd. 383 ITR 1, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that transaction charges paid to stock exchange for facility is not a fee for technical services, therefore, not liable to deduction of tax on such payments u/s.194J. Respectfully following the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kotak Securities Ltd. (supra), we do not find any merit in the acti…

Action Financial Services India Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO (TDS)1(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of assessee for both the year under consideration are allowed

ITA 7075/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jul 2016AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Rahul K. HakaniFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar
Section 115JSection 194JSection 201(1)

…was reversed and it was held that transaction tax are not liable for deduction of tax u/s.115J. 6. We have considered rival contentions and found that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kotak Securities Ltd. 383 ITR 1, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that transaction charges paid to stock exchange for facility is not a fee for technical services, therefore, not liable to deduction of tax on such payments u/s.194J. Respectfully following the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kotak Securities Ltd. (supra), we do not find any merit in the acti…

Khandwala Securities Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO TDS 2(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6994/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jun 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Ramit Kochar, Am M/S. Khandwala Securities Ltd., Vs. The Income Tax Officer (Tds), G-7, Ground Floor, Vikash Ward -2(2), Ayurved Prachar Building, Green Street, Fort, Sanstha Building, Charni Road, Mumbai 400 023 Mumbai 400 020 Pan: Aaack 2214 P Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By Shri Prateek Jha & Dr. Prayag Jha, Ars Respondent By Shri S. C. Tiwari, Dr Date Of Hearing 15-06-2016 Date Of Pronouncement 22-06-2016 O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Jm:

Section 143Section 194Section 194JSection 201Section 40

…es for facilitating is held to be not fee for technical services and the assessee is not liable to deduct TDS on such payment u/s 194- J of the Act as per the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs Kotak Securities Ltd. reported in (2016) 383 ITR 1 (SC) and according to him this issue is covered in favour of the assessee. The learned Counsel for the assessee in respect to VSAT charges also stated that the CIT (A) while adjudicating the appeal of the assessee against the assessment order passed u/s 143 (3) of the Act, disallowing the VSAT expenses for non-deduction of TDS and invoking the prov…