CIT v. Motorola India Limited

326 ITR 156High Court2010#9684 most cited

What is CIT v. Motorola India Limited authority for?

The situs of the Assessing Officer at the time of framing an assessment determines the jurisdictional High Court for entertaining an appeal. Orders under Section 201 are considered akin to an assessment.

11

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2022.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Motorola India Limited · 326 ITR 156 · Section 201 · High Court jurisdiction · situs of AO · assessment procedure · appeals · jurisdictional High Court · orders under Section 201 · assessee in default · tax deducted at source

Issues it is cited on

resulting companyinterest under section 201(1a)section 194hsection 194jsection 201(1a)fees for technical servicesassessee in defaultsection 201(1)tax deducted at sourcesection 201section 194section 20

Judgments citing CIT v. Motorola India Limited

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax 1 vs. M/S Abc Papers Limited

Appeal is dismissed by upholding the order dated 07

C.A. No.-004252-004252 - 2022Supreme Court18 Aug 2022

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA

Section 127Section 132(1)Section 143Section 260A

…followed the decision in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v. Motorola India Ltd.7 and Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Gurgaon v. M/s Parabolic Drugs Limited8. With this view of the matter, the High Court dismissed the appeal as not 7 (2010) 326 ITR 156 (P&H). 8 ITA No. 49 of 2012 (P&H). Page 6 of 28 maintainable. By the same judgment, the High Court also disposed of ITA No. 517 of 2017 filed by the Revenue against the decision of the ITAT, New Delhi, dated 11.05.2017, by adopting the same logic. Aggrieved by the decision of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana refusing to entertain the…

Shri Guru Ram Dass Educational Society, Mohali vs. Pr.CIT(Central) Gurgaon, at Chandigarh

ITA 98/CHANDI/2021[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Aug 2021AY 2021-22
For Appellant: Shri M.S. Syali, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Chandrakanta, CIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)

…hoke Glass Works reported in 125 ITR 491 (Calcutta) • DCIT Vs. Sahara India Financial Corporation Ltd. reported in 183 ITD 266 (Delhi-Trib) • CIT Vs. Parke Davis (India) Ltd. reported in 239 ITR 820 (AP) • CIT, Faridabad Vs. Motorola India Limited reported in 326 ITR 156 (P&H) • Ramshila Enterprises (P.) Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 383 ITR 546 (Calcutta) • PCIT, Pune Vs. Sungard Solutions (I)(P.) Ltd. reported in 415 ITR 294 (Bombay) • State Bank of India Vs. Chandra Govindji(Km.) reported in (2000) 8 SCC 532 (SC) • GKN Driveshaft (India) Ltd. Vs. ITO & Ors. reported in (2003) 1 SCC 72 (SC) • P.N. Eswara Iyer and Or…

Chandigarh Educational Society, Mohali vs. Pr.CIT(Central)-Gurgaon, at Chandigarh

ITA 97/CHANDI/2021[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Aug 2021AY 2021-22
For Appellant: Shri M.S. Syali, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Chandrakanta, CIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)

…hoke Glass Works reported in 125 ITR 491 (Calcutta) • DCIT Vs. Sahara India Financial Corporation Ltd. reported in 183 ITD 266 (Delhi-Trib) • CIT Vs. Parke Davis (India) Ltd. reported in 239 ITR 820 (AP) • CIT, Faridabad Vs. Motorola India Limited reported in 326 ITR 156 (P&H) • Ramshila Enterprises (P.) Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 383 ITR 546 (Calcutta) • PCIT, Pune Vs. Sungard Solutions (I)(P.) Ltd. reported in 415 ITR 294 (Bombay) • State Bank of India Vs. Chandra Govindji(Km.) reported in (2000) 8 SCC 532 (SC) • GKN Driveshaft (India) Ltd. Vs. ITO & Ors. reported in (2003) 1 SCC 72 (SC) • P.N. Eswara Iyer and Or…

Chandigarh Educational Trust, Mohali vs. Pr.CIT-Central, Gurgaon, at Chandigarh

ITA 96/CHANDI/2021[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Aug 2021AY 2021-22
For Appellant: Shri M.S. Syali, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Chandrakanta, CIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)

…hoke Glass Works reported in 125 ITR 491 (Calcutta) • DCIT Vs. Sahara India Financial Corporation Ltd. reported in 183 ITD 266 (Delhi-Trib) • CIT Vs. Parke Davis (India) Ltd. reported in 239 ITR 820 (AP) • CIT, Faridabad Vs. Motorola India Limited reported in 326 ITR 156 (P&H) • Ramshila Enterprises (P.) Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 383 ITR 546 (Calcutta) • PCIT, Pune Vs. Sungard Solutions (I)(P.) Ltd. reported in 415 ITR 294 (Bombay) • State Bank of India Vs. Chandra Govindji(Km.) reported in (2000) 8 SCC 532 (SC) • GKN Driveshaft (India) Ltd. Vs. ITO & Ors. reported in (2003) 1 SCC 72 (SC) • P.N. Eswara Iyer and Or…

Vodafone Idea Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO (TDS), Karnal

The appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 2467/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jan 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, Adv. & MsFor Respondent: Ms. Sulekha Verma, CIT-DR
Section 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

…passed by the AO in Karnal and the jurisdictional High Court in the present case was the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court. For this proposition he relied on the judgment of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Motorola India Limited (326 ITR 156) where the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court had clearly held that the situs of the AO at the time when the assessment was framed would be the determinative factor for the High Court jurisdiction to entertain an appeal. He also relied on the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of DDA Vs. ITO (230 ITR 9) [further confirmed by the Suprem…

Vodafone Idea Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO (TDS), Karnal

The appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 2466/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jan 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, Adv. & MsFor Respondent: Ms. Sulekha Verma, CIT-DR
Section 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

…passed by the AO in Karnal and the jurisdictional High Court in the present case was the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court. For this proposition he relied on the judgment of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Motorola India Limited (326 ITR 156) where the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court had clearly held that the situs of the AO at the time when the assessment was framed would be the determinative factor for the High Court jurisdiction to entertain an appeal. He also relied on the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of DDA Vs. ITO (230 ITR 9) [further confirmed by the Suprem…

Vodafone Idea Ltd. (Earlier Knwon As Vodafone Mobile Services Ltd.), New Delhi vs. ITO, TDS, Karnal

The appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 120/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jan 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, Adv. & MsFor Respondent: Ms. Sulekha Verma, CIT-DR
Section 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

…passed by the AO in Karnal and the jurisdictional High Court in the present case was the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court. For this proposition he relied on the judgment of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Motorola India Limited (326 ITR 156) where the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court had clearly held that the situs of the AO at the time when the assessment was framed would be the determinative factor for the High Court jurisdiction to entertain an appeal. He also relied on the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of DDA Vs. ITO (230 ITR 9) [further confirmed by the Suprem…

Vodafone Idea Ltd. (Earlier Knwon As Vodafone Mobile Services Ltd.), New Delhi vs. ITO, TDS, Karnal

The appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 119/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jan 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, Adv. & MsFor Respondent: Ms. Sulekha Verma, CIT-DR
Section 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

…passed by the AO in Karnal and the jurisdictional High Court in the present case was the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court. For this proposition he relied on the judgment of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Motorola India Limited (326 ITR 156) where the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court had clearly held that the situs of the AO at the time when the assessment was framed would be the determinative factor for the High Court jurisdiction to entertain an appeal. He also relied on the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of DDA Vs. ITO (230 ITR 9) [further confirmed by the Suprem…

Vodafone Idea Ltd. (Earlier Knwon As Vodafone Mobile Services Ltd.), New Delhi vs. ITO, TDS, Karnal

The appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 118/DEL/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jan 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, Adv. & MsFor Respondent: Ms. Sulekha Verma, CIT-DR
Section 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

…passed by the AO in Karnal and the jurisdictional High Court in the present case was the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court. For this proposition he relied on the judgment of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Motorola India Limited (326 ITR 156) where the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court had clearly held that the situs of the AO at the time when the assessment was framed would be the determinative factor for the High Court jurisdiction to entertain an appeal. He also relied on the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of DDA Vs. ITO (230 ITR 9) [further confirmed by the Suprem…

CIT vs. Aar Bee Industries

ITA - 149 / 2012HC Delhi02 Jul 2013
For Appellant: Mr N. P. SahniFor Respondent: Mr C.S. Aggarwal, Sr Advocate with Mr Prakash
Section 143(2)Section 260Section 80

…ITA No.148/12, 149/12 & 2/13 Page 1 of 13 THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 02.07.2013 + ITA Nos. 148/2012, ITA 149/2012 & ITA 2/2013 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-X … Appellant versus M/S AAR BEE INDUSTRIES … Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant : Mr N. P. Sahni For the Respondent : Mr C.S. Aggarwal, Sr Advocate with Mr Prakash Kumar, Ms Pushpa Sharma CORAM:- HON’BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED, THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, ACJ 1. These appeals (ITA No.149/2012, 148/2012 and 2/2013) relate to the asses…

CIT vs. Aar Bee Industries

ITA - 148 / 2012HC Delhi02 Jul 2013
For Appellant: Mr N. P. SahniFor Respondent: Mr C.S. Aggarwal, Sr Advocate with Mr Prakash
Section 143(2)Section 260Section 80

…ITA No.148/12, 149/12 & 2/13 Page 1 of 13 THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 02.07.2013 + ITA Nos. 148/2012, ITA 149/2012 & ITA 2/2013 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-X … Appellant versus M/S AAR BEE INDUSTRIES … Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant : Mr N. P. Sahni For the Respondent : Mr C.S. Aggarwal, Sr Advocate with Mr Prakash Kumar, Ms Pushpa Sharma CORAM:- HON’BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED, THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, ACJ 1. These appeals (ITA No.149/2012, 148/2012 and 2/2013) relate to the asses…

CIT v. Motorola India Limited (326 ITR 156) — Cited in 11 Judgments | BharatTax