CIT v. R.D. Aggarwal and Co.

56 ITR 20Supreme Court of India1965#631 most cited

What is CIT v. R.D. Aggarwal and Co. authority for?

A 'business connection' for non-residents requires a real and intimate relation between their trading activities outside India and activities within India, contributing directly or indirectly to their earnings. The Supreme Court assigned a wide meaning to this term.

156

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. R.D. Aggarwal and Co. · 56 ITR 20 · Section 9(1)(i) · Section 195 · business connection · non-resident income · income deemed to accrue · real and intimate relation · PE threshold

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 1961Section 9(1)(vii)Section 144C(13)Section 234BSection 9(1)(i)Section 115A
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 44bbbdependent agent pesection 9(1)(i)agency peconstruction pefixed place pesection 44bbsection 5(2)business connectionsection 42section 44bsection 115a

Judgments citing CIT v. R.D. Aggarwal and Co.

Knight Frank (India) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT - 2(2)(1), Mumbai

ITA 2842/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jun 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Soodm/S Knight Frank (India) Pvt. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Ltd. C/O Kalyaniwalla & Mistry Tax-2(2)(1), Llp, 2Nd Floor, Esplanade Room No. 548, 5Th Floor, Vs. House No. 29, Hazarimal Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Marg, Somani Marg, Fort, Mumbai. Mumbai 400 001 Pan – Aaack1544J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri M.M. Golvala &For Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Singh, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40Section 9(2)

…f no operations of business are carried out in the taxable territories, it follows that the income accruing or arising abroad through or from any business connection in India cannot be deemed to accrue or arise in India [See CIT vs. R.D. Aggarwal & Co. (1965) 56 ITR 20 (SC) and Carborandum Co. vs. CIT (1977) 108 ITR 335 (SC) which are decided on the basis of s. 42 of the Indian IT Act, 1922, which corresponds to s. 9(1)(i) of the Act]. 9. In the instant case, the non-resident assessees did not carry on any business operations in the taxable territories. They acted as selling agents outside India. The receipt in I…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Kapoor Industries, New Delhi

Accordingly the entire three grounds rose in appeal for AY 2011-12 is dismissed

ITA 4050/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri R. K. Mehra, CAFor Respondent: Shri K Hauthang, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40Section 9

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “D”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 4049 & 4050/Del/2015 (Assessment Year: 2011-12 and 2012-13) ACIT, Vs. Kapoor Industries, Circle-32(1), 29A-2/1, Desu Road, New Delhi Mehrauli, New Delhi PAN: AAAFK2669P (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue by : Shri K Hauthang, Sr. DR Assessee by: Shri R. K. Mehra, CA Date of Hearing 13/03/2019 Date of pronouncement 28/05/2019 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. These appeals are filed by the revenue against the order of the ld CIT(A)-11, New Delhi dated 2…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Kapoor Industries, New Delhi

Accordingly the entire three grounds rose in appeal for AY 2011-12 is dismissed

ITA 4049/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 May 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri R. K. Mehra, CAFor Respondent: Shri K Hauthang, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40Section 9

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “D”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 4049 & 4050/Del/2015 (Assessment Year: 2011-12 and 2012-13) ACIT, Vs. Kapoor Industries, Circle-32(1), 29A-2/1, Desu Road, New Delhi Mehrauli, New Delhi PAN: AAAFK2669P (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue by : Shri K Hauthang, Sr. DR Assessee by: Shri R. K. Mehra, CA Date of Hearing 13/03/2019 Date of pronouncement 28/05/2019 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. These appeals are filed by the revenue against the order of the ld CIT(A)-11, New Delhi dated 2…

DCIT, Cir-11(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Ershisanye Construction Group (I) Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 260/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Apr 2019AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, J.M. & Dr.A.L.Saini, A.M.) Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Cir-11(1), Kolkata Vs M/S. Ershisanye Construction Group (I) Ltd. Pan:Aacce0687Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Dr.Shri P.K. Srihari, CIT, ld.DRFor Respondent: None appeared/Adj. Petition not filed
Section 2(26)Section 42Section 9Section 9(1)(i)Section 90(2)

…med to accrue or arise in India. M/s. Erhisanye Construction Group (I) Ltd 2 As per Explanation 2 to Section. 9(1)(i) of the Act, "business connection" has been defined in an inclusive manner. The Supreme Court in C.I. T v R. D. Aggarwal and Co. and another 56 ITR 20 (SC) has elucidated business connection as follows: "The expression "business connection" undoubtedly means something more than "business". A business connection in section 42 involves a relation between a business carried on by a non-resident which yields profits or gains and some activity in the taxable territories which contributes directly or…

ADIT, New Delhi vs. Nokia Corportion, Gurgaon

ITA 1235/DEL/2010[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Mar 2019AY 2003-04

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

For Appellant: Sh. Deepak Chopra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. G.K.Dhatt, CIT(DR)
Section 44D

…d and held as under:— It is apparent from the plain reading of Section 9(1) of the Act that all income which accrues or arises through or from any business connection in India would be deemed to accrue or arise in India. In C1T v. R.D. Aggarwal & Co.: (1965) 56 ITR 20 (SC), the Supreme Court observed that business connection would mean "a relation between a business carried on by a non-resident and some activity in the taxable territories which are attributable directly or indirectly 60 ITA No. 2135-2137, 2286-2288/Del/2005 ITA No. 1004, 1005,1234,1235/Del/2010 to the earnings, profits or gains of such business…

ADIT, New Delhi vs. Nokia Corportion, Gurgaon

ITA 1234/DEL/2010[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Mar 2019AY 2002-03

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

For Appellant: Sh. Deepak Chopra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. G.K.Dhatt, CIT(DR)
Section 44D

…d and held as under:— It is apparent from the plain reading of Section 9(1) of the Act that all income which accrues or arises through or from any business connection in India would be deemed to accrue or arise in India. In C1T v. R.D. Aggarwal & Co.: (1965) 56 ITR 20 (SC), the Supreme Court observed that business connection would mean "a relation between a business carried on by a non-resident and some activity in the taxable territories which are attributable directly or indirectly 60 ITA No. 2135-2137, 2286-2288/Del/2005 ITA No. 1004, 1005,1234,1235/Del/2010 to the earnings, profits or gains of such business…

M/S. Nokia Corporation (Formerly Nokia Networks Oy), New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 1005/DEL/2010[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Mar 2019AY 2003-04

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

For Appellant: Sh. Deepak Chopra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. G.K.Dhatt, CIT(DR)
Section 44D

…d and held as under:— It is apparent from the plain reading of Section 9(1) of the Act that all income which accrues or arises through or from any business connection in India would be deemed to accrue or arise in India. In C1T v. R.D. Aggarwal & Co.: (1965) 56 ITR 20 (SC), the Supreme Court observed that business connection would mean "a relation between a business carried on by a non-resident and some activity in the taxable territories which are attributable directly or indirectly 60 ITA No. 2135-2137, 2286-2288/Del/2005 ITA No. 1004, 1005,1234,1235/Del/2010 to the earnings, profits or gains of such business…

M/S. Nokia Corporation (Formerly Nokia Networks Oy), New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 1004/DEL/2010[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Mar 2019AY 2002-03

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

For Appellant: Sh. Deepak Chopra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. G.K.Dhatt, CIT(DR)
Section 44D

…d and held as under:— It is apparent from the plain reading of Section 9(1) of the Act that all income which accrues or arises through or from any business connection in India would be deemed to accrue or arise in India. In C1T v. R.D. Aggarwal & Co.: (1965) 56 ITR 20 (SC), the Supreme Court observed that business connection would mean "a relation between a business carried on by a non-resident and some activity in the taxable territories which are attributable directly or indirectly 60 ITA No. 2135-2137, 2286-2288/Del/2005 ITA No. 1004, 1005,1234,1235/Del/2010 to the earnings, profits or gains of such business…

Asstt. Director of I. Tax vs. Nokia Corporation

ITA 2288/DEL/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Mar 2019AY 2001-2002

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

For Appellant: Sh. Deepak Chopra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. G.K.Dhatt, CIT(DR)
Section 44D

…d and held as under:— It is apparent from the plain reading of Section 9(1) of the Act that all income which accrues or arises through or from any business connection in India would be deemed to accrue or arise in India. In C1T v. R.D. Aggarwal & Co.: (1965) 56 ITR 20 (SC), the Supreme Court observed that business connection would mean "a relation between a business carried on by a non-resident and some activity in the taxable territories which are attributable directly or indirectly 60 ITA No. 2135-2137, 2286-2288/Del/2005 ITA No. 1004, 1005,1234,1235/Del/2010 to the earnings, profits or gains of such business…

Asstt. Director of I. Tax vs. Nokia Corporation

ITA 2287/DEL/2005[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Mar 2019AY 2000-2001

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

For Appellant: Sh. Deepak Chopra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. G.K.Dhatt, CIT(DR)
Section 44D

…d and held as under:— It is apparent from the plain reading of Section 9(1) of the Act that all income which accrues or arises through or from any business connection in India would be deemed to accrue or arise in India. In C1T v. R.D. Aggarwal & Co.: (1965) 56 ITR 20 (SC), the Supreme Court observed that business connection would mean "a relation between a business carried on by a non-resident and some activity in the taxable territories which are attributable directly or indirectly 60 ITA No. 2135-2137, 2286-2288/Del/2005 ITA No. 1004, 1005,1234,1235/Del/2010 to the earnings, profits or gains of such business…

Asstt. Director of I. Tax vs. Nokia Corporation

ITA 2286/DEL/2005[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Mar 2019AY 1999-2000

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

For Appellant: Sh. Deepak Chopra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. G.K.Dhatt, CIT(DR)
Section 44D

…d and held as under:— It is apparent from the plain reading of Section 9(1) of the Act that all income which accrues or arises through or from any business connection in India would be deemed to accrue or arise in India. In C1T v. R.D. Aggarwal & Co.: (1965) 56 ITR 20 (SC), the Supreme Court observed that business connection would mean "a relation between a business carried on by a non-resident and some activity in the taxable territories which are attributable directly or indirectly 60 ITA No. 2135-2137, 2286-2288/Del/2005 ITA No. 1004, 1005,1234,1235/Del/2010 to the earnings, profits or gains of such business…

Nokia Corporation vs. ACIT, Circle-2(1)

ITA 2137/DEL/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Mar 2019AY 2001-2002

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

For Appellant: Sh. Deepak Chopra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. G.K.Dhatt, CIT(DR)
Section 44D

…d and held as under:— It is apparent from the plain reading of Section 9(1) of the Act that all income which accrues or arises through or from any business connection in India would be deemed to accrue or arise in India. In C1T v. R.D. Aggarwal & Co.: (1965) 56 ITR 20 (SC), the Supreme Court observed that business connection would mean "a relation between a business carried on by a non-resident and some activity in the taxable territories which are attributable directly or indirectly 60 ITA No. 2135-2137, 2286-2288/Del/2005 ITA No. 1004, 1005,1234,1235/Del/2010 to the earnings, profits or gains of such business…

Nokia Corporation vs. ACIT, Circle-2(1)

ITA 2136/DEL/2005[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Mar 2019AY 2000-2001

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

For Appellant: Sh. Deepak Chopra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. G.K.Dhatt, CIT(DR)
Section 44D

…d and held as under:— It is apparent from the plain reading of Section 9(1) of the Act that all income which accrues or arises through or from any business connection in India would be deemed to accrue or arise in India. In C1T v. R.D. Aggarwal & Co.: (1965) 56 ITR 20 (SC), the Supreme Court observed that business connection would mean "a relation between a business carried on by a non-resident and some activity in the taxable territories which are attributable directly or indirectly 60 ITA No. 2135-2137, 2286-2288/Del/2005 ITA No. 1004, 1005,1234,1235/Del/2010 to the earnings, profits or gains of such business…

Nokia Corporation vs. ACIT, Circle-2(1)

ITA 2135/DEL/2005[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Mar 2019AY 1999-2000

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

For Appellant: Sh. Deepak Chopra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. G.K.Dhatt, CIT(DR)
Section 44D

…d and held as under:— It is apparent from the plain reading of Section 9(1) of the Act that all income which accrues or arises through or from any business connection in India would be deemed to accrue or arise in India. In C1T v. R.D. Aggarwal & Co.: (1965) 56 ITR 20 (SC), the Supreme Court observed that business connection would mean "a relation between a business carried on by a non-resident and some activity in the taxable territories which are attributable directly or indirectly 60 ITA No. 2135-2137, 2286-2288/Del/2005 ITA No. 1004, 1005,1234,1235/Del/2010 to the earnings, profits or gains of such business…

ACIT Non Corp. Circle 2, Coimbatore vs. Cotton Code Garments, Coimbatore

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2117/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Jan 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri A.Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan, Advocate
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 40Section 9(1)Section 9(1)(v)Section 9(1)(vi)Section 9(1)(vii)Section 9(2)

…and from business connection in India shall be only such profits and gains as are reasonably attributable to that part of the operations carried out in the taxable territories. If no operations of business are carried out in the taxable territories, it [1965] 56 ITR 20 (SC) and Carborandum Co. v. CIT [1977] 108 ITR 335 (SC) which are decided on the basis of s. 42 of the Indian I.T. Act, 1922, which corresponds to s. 9(1)(i) of the Act). 9. In the instant case, the non-resident assessees did not carry on any business operations in the taxable territories. They acted as selling agents outside India. The receipt in…

The ACIT, Bharuch Circle, Bharuch vs. M/S. Ramdev Chemical Industries, Ankleshwar

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2999/AHD/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat15 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No. 2999/Ahd/2014 िनधा"रण वष"/A.Y.:2010-11 Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/S. Ramdev Chemical Of Income Tax, Bharuch Industries, 3441-B, Gidc, Circle - Bharuch Industrial Estate Ankleshwar Pan: Aacfr3839A अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143Section 195Section 40Section 5Section 9Section 9(1)(i)

…ssion agents, is in India, but the services have been rendered by them in Europe i.e. outside India and these recipients do not have any place of Establishment in India. Therefore, after considering the various case laws including CIT v. R D Agarwal [1965] 56 ITR 20 (SC) and submission of the assessee the CIT(A) deleted the addition of Rs.50,41,238 made by the AO. ACIT-2 Bharuch v. Ramdev Chemical Industries /I.T.A. No.2999/Ahd/2014/A.Y.:10-11 Page 5 of 10 5. Being aggrieved, the Revenue has filed this appeal before the Tribunal. The learned Sr. D.R. submitted that the CIT(A) was not justified in deleting…

DCIT, Circle-15(2), Kolkata vs. M/S L.G.W. Limited, North 24 Parganas

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1786/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2012-13 Dcit, Circle-15(2), V/S. M/S L.G.W. Ltd., 10, Shantipally, Em Vill. Narayanpur, P.O. Bypass, Aayakar Rajarhat, Gopalpur, 24- Bhawan, Poorva, 6Th Parganas (North), West Floor, R.No.615, Bengal-700136 Kolkata-700 107 [Pan No.Aaacl 4670 N] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri G. Mallikarjuna, Cit- अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Dr Shri A.K. Tibrerwal, Ar ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 09-07-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 05-10-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Revenue’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2012-13 Is Directed Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Kolkata’S Order Dated 29.06.2016, Passed In Case No.47/Cit(A)-5/Cir.14(1)/15-16, In Proceedings U/S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Heard Both The Parties Case File Perused. 2. The Revenue’S First Substantive Ground Challenges Correctness Of The Cit(A)’S Action Reversing Assessment Findings Disallowing The Taxpayer’S Commission Payments Made To Foreign Export Agents Amounting To ₹257,60,898/- For Non Deduction Of Tds U/S 40(A)(I) As Follows:- “1. Commission To Foreign Agents - Rs.2,57,60,898/- The Ao Has Added Sum Of Rs.2,57,60,898/- By Holding That The Said Amounts Were Paid To Foreign Agents Without Deduction Of Tds U/S.195. The Addition Has Been Made U/S

Section 1Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40Section 9Section 9(1)Section 9(1)(vi)

…If no operations of business are carried out in the taxable territories, it follows that the income accruing or arising abroad through or from any business connection in India cannot be deemed to accrue or arise in India (See CIT v R.D.Aggarwal and CO. [1965J 56 ITR 20 (SC) and Carborandum Co. v. CIT [1977] 108 ITR 335 (SC) which are decided on the basis of s.42 of the Indian I. T. Act , 192, which corresponds to s. 9( l)(i) of the Act). 9. In the instant case, the non-resident assesses did not carry on any business operations in the taxable territories. They acted as selling agents outside India. The receipt in…

ITO, New Delhi vs. Sh. Kulbeer Singh, New Delhi

ITA 5204/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishiito, Vs. Kulbeer Singh, Ward-26(1), H-432, Vikas Puri, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Amqps5847P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 195Section 197Section 40Section 9

…if such person is acting in the ordinary course of his business and rendering services outside India. The concept of „business connection was dealt with in the decision of Hon‟ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT vs. R.D. Aggarwal & Co. & Anr. (1965) 56 ITR 20* (SC) wherein the Apex Court held that a Business Connection “involves a relation between a business carried on by a non resident which yields profit or gains and some activity in the taxable territories which contributes directly or indirectly to the earning of those profits or gains. It predicates an element of continuity between the business of…

ACIT 27(3), Navi Mumbai vs. Ramesh P. Singh, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2012-2013

ITA 974/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2012-13 The A.C.I.T. 27(3), Shri Ramesh P. Singh, 4Th Floor, Tower No. 6, Prop. Of M/S Aditya Investment Vashi Railway Station Complex & Exim Trade (Co.), Vashi, Vs. Plot No. 23, Pallvi Building, Navi Mumbai Maneklal Estate, Ghatkopar (E), Mumbai - 400086 Pan: Aagps2739C (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri Chaitanya Anjaria (Dr) Assessee By : None Date Of Hearing: 12/09/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 28/09/2018

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Chaitanya Anjaria (DR)
Section 143Section 143(2)Section 195Section 40Section 5(2)(b)Section 7Section 9(1)(i)

…arise in India shall be only such part of the income as is reasonably attributable to the operations carried out in India. …….. …….. ……..” 7.5 The concept of “business connection” was dealt with in the landmark case of CIT vs R.D. Aggarwal & Co. & ANR. (1965 56 ITR 20 SC) where the Apex Court held that a business connection- “involves a relation between a business carried on by a non-resident which yields profits or gain and some activity in the taxable territories which contributes directly or indirectly to the earning of those profits or gains. It predicates an element of continuity between the business of th…

Asst CIT 19(3), Mumbai vs. S.K. Age Exports, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2524/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2013-14 Acit-19(3), M/S S.K. Age Exports, R. No.206M 2Nd Floor, 3-A, Shivsagar Estate, Dr. बनाम/ Matru Mandir, Annie Besant Road, Worli, Vs. Tardeo Raod, Mumbai-400018 Mumbai-400007 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No. Aaafs4534R

Section 143(3)Section 195

…e in India only if the non- resident is having Business Connection in India. 2.4.19 The term business connection is elaborated in Explanation 2 to S. 9(1) of the Act, and is discussed in depth by the Apex Court in the case of R. O. Aggarwal & Company. (1965) 56 ITR 20. 2.4.20 The Apex Court in the case of Toshoku Ltd. (1980) 125 ITR 525 has held that the commission amounts which were earned by the non-resident assessees for services rendered outside India cannot be deemed income accrued or arisen in India. 2.4.21 The Madras ITAT in the case of Indopel Garments Pvt. Ltd. (2003) 86 ITO 102 referred the case of To…