CIT v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.

16 Taxmann.com 141High Court2012#347 most cited

What is CIT v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. authority for?

Section 195 requires tax deduction at source on the gross sum paid to a non-resident even if no part of the income is chargeable in India, particularly if no application under Section 195(2) or 195(3) is filed.

244

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. · Section 195 · TDS on non-residents · withholding tax · sum chargeable to tax · computer software royalty · Section 9(1)(vi) · Section 195(2) · overruled by GE India

Also reported as

320 ITR 209

Sections most often in play

Section 195Section 40(a)(i)Section 9(1)(vi)Section 250Section 9

Issues it is cited on

section 9(1)(vi)computer softwaresection 9(1)fees for technical servicessection 195non-residentsection 19transferindiacompanybusinessperson

Judgments citing CIT v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.

ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),AGRA, AGRA vs. EMCO EXPORTS, AGRA

In the result, revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 415/AGR/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Agra15 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2020-21

Section 195Section 250Section 40Section 9

…yable to non-resident for services rendered outside India becomes allowable expenditure and the same is outside rigors of the section 40a(ia) of the Act. 15 | P a g e 10. The judgment of the Karnataka High Court in the case of Samsung Electronics reported in 320 ITR 209, relied on by the department, dealt on whether tax is to be deducted at source, under section 195 of the Act, in respect of payment made to non- resident, on import of software. The judgment of the Karnataka High Court is largely based on the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Transmission Corporation of AP Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 239 ITR…

SHELL GLOBAL SOLUTIONS INTERNATIONAL B.V,,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT, INTL. TAXN.-2, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, while the CO filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1783/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarwith Co No.20/Ahd/2022 Assessment Year : 2014-15 & 1783/Ahd/2019 Assessment Year : 2015-16 Shell Global Solutions International B.V.,, Acit, International C/O. Bsr Associates & Llp Vs Taxation-1 903, Commerce House V Ahmedabad. Nr.Vodafone House Prahaladnagar Corporation Road, Ahmedabad. Pan : Aaics 3589 H (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocate & Shri Parin Shah, Ar : Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05/09/2024 & 06/12/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 18/12/2024

Section 143(3)Section 144C

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘D अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD ] ] BEFORE SMT.ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER WITH CO NO.20/Ahd/2022 Assessment Year : 2014-15 AND 1783/Ahd/2019 Assessment Year : 2015-16 Shell Global Solutions International B.V.,, ACIT, International C/o. BSR Associates & LLP Vs Taxation-1 903, Commerce House V Ahmedabad. Nr.Vodafone House Prahaladnagar Corporation Road…

SHELL GLOBAL SOLUTIONS INTERNATIONAL B.V,,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT, INTL. TAXN.-1,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, while the CO filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2390/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarwith Co No.20/Ahd/2022 Assessment Year : 2014-15 & 1783/Ahd/2019 Assessment Year : 2015-16 Shell Global Solutions International B.V.,, Acit, International C/O. Bsr Associates & Llp Vs Taxation-1 903, Commerce House V Ahmedabad. Nr.Vodafone House Prahaladnagar Corporation Road, Ahmedabad. Pan : Aaics 3589 H (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocate & Shri Parin Shah, Ar : Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05/09/2024 & 06/12/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 18/12/2024

Section 143(3)Section 144C

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘D अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD ] ] BEFORE SMT.ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER WITH CO NO.20/Ahd/2022 Assessment Year : 2014-15 AND 1783/Ahd/2019 Assessment Year : 2015-16 Shell Global Solutions International B.V.,, ACIT, International C/o. BSR Associates & LLP Vs Taxation-1 903, Commerce House V Ahmedabad. Nr.Vodafone House Prahaladnagar Corporation Road…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI vs. DOOSAN POWER SYSTEMS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1149/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 1149/Chny/2023 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Deputy Commissioner Of Doosan Power Systems India Income Tax, V. Private Limited, Corporate Circle -1(1), 18/2A, Sennerkuppam, Bye Chennai. Pass Road, Poonamallee, Chennai – 600 056. [Pan:Aabcb-5946-J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri. Sandeep Bagmar, Ca सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20.08.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.10.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CITFor Respondent: Shri. Sandeep Bagmar, CA
Section 144BSection 147Section 195Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…he income is chargeable in India, even clearance under Section 195(2) or 195(3) of the IT Act is not necessary. The decision of the Karnataka High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation) v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., reported in (2010) 320 ITR 209 (Kar), has been overruled by the Supreme Court in GE India Technology Centre P. Ltd. V. CIT, reported in (2010) 327 ITR 456 (SC). The Supreme Court held as under: “This reasoning flows from the words ‘sum chargeable under the provisions of the Act’ in Section 195(1). The fact that the Revenue had not obtained any information per se cannot be a gr…

M/S. DATALOG TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,COIMBATOREE vs. DCIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION,, COIMBATORE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for all the three assessment years are allowed

ITA 937/CHNY/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 935, 936 & 937/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Datalog Technologies V. Income-Tax, Private Limited, International Taxation, Flat No. 6, 3Rd Street, Coimbatore. Narayandas Layout, Tatabad, Coimbatore – 641 012. [Pan: Aabcd-5720-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08.05.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31.05.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 195Section 201(1)Section 9Section 9(1)(vii)

…he income is chargeable in India, even clearance under Section 195(2) or 195(3) of the IT Act is not necessary. The decision of the Karnataka High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation) v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., reported in (2010) 320 ITR 209 (Kar), has been overruled :-15-: ITA. Nos: 935, 936 & 937/Chny/2023 by the Supreme Court in GE India Technology Centre P. Ltd. v. CIT, reported in (2010) 327 ITR 456 (SC). The Supreme Court held as under: “This reasoning flows from the words 'sum chargeable under the provisions of the Act' in Section 195(1). The fact that the Revenue had not obt…

M/S. DATALOG TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, INERNATIONAL TAXATION, , COIMBATORE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for all the three assessment years are allowed

ITA 936/CHNY/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 935, 936 & 937/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Datalog Technologies V. Income-Tax, Private Limited, International Taxation, Flat No. 6, 3Rd Street, Coimbatore. Narayandas Layout, Tatabad, Coimbatore – 641 012. [Pan: Aabcd-5720-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08.05.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31.05.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 195Section 201(1)Section 9Section 9(1)(vii)

…he income is chargeable in India, even clearance under Section 195(2) or 195(3) of the IT Act is not necessary. The decision of the Karnataka High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation) v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., reported in (2010) 320 ITR 209 (Kar), has been overruled :-15-: ITA. Nos: 935, 936 & 937/Chny/2023 by the Supreme Court in GE India Technology Centre P. Ltd. v. CIT, reported in (2010) 327 ITR 456 (SC). The Supreme Court held as under: “This reasoning flows from the words 'sum chargeable under the provisions of the Act' in Section 195(1). The fact that the Revenue had not obt…

M/S. DATALOG TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, COIMBATORE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for all the three assessment years are allowed

ITA 935/CHNY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 935, 936 & 937/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Datalog Technologies V. Income-Tax, Private Limited, International Taxation, Flat No. 6, 3Rd Street, Coimbatore. Narayandas Layout, Tatabad, Coimbatore – 641 012. [Pan: Aabcd-5720-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08.05.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31.05.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 195Section 201(1)Section 9Section 9(1)(vii)

…he income is chargeable in India, even clearance under Section 195(2) or 195(3) of the IT Act is not necessary. The decision of the Karnataka High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation) v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., reported in (2010) 320 ITR 209 (Kar), has been overruled :-15-: ITA. Nos: 935, 936 & 937/Chny/2023 by the Supreme Court in GE India Technology Centre P. Ltd. v. CIT, reported in (2010) 327 ITR 456 (SC). The Supreme Court held as under: “This reasoning flows from the words 'sum chargeable under the provisions of the Act' in Section 195(1). The fact that the Revenue had not obt…

MARVEL DRUGS PVT LTD.,,MUMBAI vs. ITO-6(3)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3626/MUM/2023[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailassessment Year: 2006-07 M/S. Marvel Drugs Pvt. Ito 6(3)(3), Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, 20, Nagin Mahal, Vs. Mumbai – 400 020 82 Vn Road, Mumbai – 400 020 Pan: Aaacm4655N (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Surendra Nijsure, A.R. Revenue By : Smt Mahita Nair, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 21.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 27/02/.2024 O R D E R Per : Sandeep Singh Karhail: 1. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Challenging The Impugned Order Dated 11/08/2023 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [“Learned Cit(A)”], For The Assessment Year 2006-07, Which In Turn Arose From The Penalty Order Dated 26/03/2013 Passed Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Surendra Nijsure, A.RFor Respondent: Smt Mahita Nair, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 40

…ction 195(2) and makes the remittance without deduction of tax at source, the assessee should be visited with consequences for non deduction of tax at source, which was accepted by Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs Samsung Electronic Co Ltd ( 320 ITR 209), was categorically rejected by Their Lordships, and Their Lordships observed as follows: In our view, section 195(2) is based on the "principle of proportionality". The said sub -section gets attracted only in cases where the payment ma de is a composite payment in which a certain proportion of payment has an element of "income" chargeable to ta…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION CIRCLE 2 2, BMTC BUILDING KORAMANGALA vs. THE OASIS CENTRE LLC, DUBAI UAE

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 959/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Chandra Poojariit(It)A No.959/Bang/2023 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Dcit (International Taxation), Vs. M/S. The Oasis Centre Llc, Circle – 2(2), Land Mark Group West Wing Building Bengaluru. No.3, Off Hal Airport Main Road, Yamlur – 560 037, Bangalore. Pan : Aafct 2481 C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. K. R. Vasudevan, Advocate Revenue By : Ms. Neera Malhotra, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 07.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 08.02.2024

For Appellant: Shri. K. R. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(2)Section 250Section 9(1)(vi)

…on 9(1)(vi) of the Act and hence the payment towards use of software shall be treated as “royalty”. In this context, the learned AR relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of M/s. Samsung Electronic Ltd., reported in (2010) 320 ITR 209 (Karnataka). The AO had also relied on the following judicial pronouncements: IT(IT)A No.959/Bang/2023 Page 3 of 8 1. Citrix Systems Asis Pacific Pry Ltd lnre vs (2012) 18 taxmann.com 172 (AAR-New Delhi) 2. C1T vs. Synopsis International Old Ltd., (2012) 28 taxmann.com 162. the HC of Karnataka. 3. CIT vs CGI Information Systems and Management c…

DCIT-INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-1(2), BENGALURU vs. SYNAMEDIA INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1046/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jan 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R
Section 133ASection 201Section 250

…IT(IT)A Nos.1023 to 1025 & 1046/Bang/2023 Synamedia India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(IT)A Nos.1023 to 1025 & 1046/Bang/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2016-17 respectively Synamedia India Pvt. Ltd. B9A & 9B7th Floor DCIT Pritech Park SEZ S.No.51-64/4 International Taxation Sarjapur Outer Ring Road Circle-1(2) Vs. Bellandur Village Bangalore Bengaluru 560 103 Karnataka PAN NO : AACCN1140K APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Ketan Ved, A.R. Resp…

DCIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-1(2), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. SYNAMEDIA INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, BENGALURU

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1025/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R
Section 133ASection 201Section 250

…IT(IT)A Nos.1023 to 1025 & 1046/Bang/2023 Synamedia India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(IT)A Nos.1023 to 1025 & 1046/Bang/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2016-17 respectively Synamedia India Pvt. Ltd. B9A & 9B7th Floor DCIT Pritech Park SEZ S.No.51-64/4 International Taxation Sarjapur Outer Ring Road Circle-1(2) Vs. Bellandur Village Bangalore Bengaluru 560 103 Karnataka PAN NO : AACCN1140K APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Ketan Ved, A.R. Resp…

DCIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-1(2), BENGALURU vs. SYNAMEDIA INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, BENGALURU

ITA 1024/BANG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jan 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(It)A Nos.1023 To 1025 & 1046/Bang/2023

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R
Section 133ASection 201Section 250

…IT(IT)A Nos. 1023 to 1025 & 1046/Bang/2023 Synamedia India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "A" BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(IT)A Nos.1023 to 1025 & 1046/Bang/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2016-17 respectively APPELLANT DCIT International Taxation Circle-1(2) Bangalore RESPONDENT Synamedia India Pvt. Ltd. B9A & 9B7th Floor Pritech Park SEZ S.No.51-64/4 Sarjapur Outer Ring Road Vs. Bellandur Village Bengaluru 560 103 Karnataka PAN NO : AACCN1140K Appellant by : Shri Ketan Ved, A.R. Respondent…

SYNAMEDIA LIMITED,UNITED KINGDOM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE 1(2), BENGALURU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 940/BANG/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Dec 2023AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Rajgopal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Jeetendra Kumar, D.R

…IT(IT)A No.940/Bang/2023 Synamedia Limited, United Kingdom IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(IT)A No.940/Bang/2023 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Synamedia Limited One London Road Staines Upon Thames ACIT London International Taxation Vs. Middlesex, TW 18 4 EX Circle-1(2) United Kingdom Bangalore PAN NO : AABCN2524L APPELLANT RESPONDENT S.P. No.41/Bang/2023 (Arising out of IT(IT)A No.940/Bang/2023) Assessment Year: 2021-22 Synamedia Limited ACIT United Kingdom International Taxation Vs. Circle-1(…

DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 3(1), CHENNAI vs. TRUSTED AEROSPACE ENGINEERING (P) LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 473/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Mr. S.Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: 26.04.2023
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40Section 9Section 9(1)(vii)

…ax at source under section 195 of the Act does not arise. It arises only when such remittance is a sum chargeable to tax under the Income Tax Act under sections 4, 5 and 9 of the Act. The ratio laid down by the Karnataka High Court judgment in the cited case (320 ITR 209) has been set aside in that case. From the above, it could be seen that what is relevant is whether the payment includes any income component and if so whether the same is chargeable to tax. In the appellant's case from the facts and from the legal position discussed as above, it appears that the payment made is not liable to tax in India. Hence…

UPTODATE INC.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), INT. TAXATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is allowed, to the extent indicated

ITA 7347/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Uptodate Inc., Vs. Dcit, 10Th Floor, Building No. 10, Circle-3(1)(1), Intl. Taxation, Phase-Ii, Dlf Cyber City, New Delhi Gurgaon Pan :Aabcu1828Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 9(1)(vi)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘D’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/s. Uptodate Inc., Vs. DCIT, 10th Floor, Building No. 10, Circle-3(1)(1), Intl. Taxation, Phase-II, DLF Cyber City, New Delhi Gurgaon PAN :AABCU1828Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Salil Kapoor, Advocate Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Advocate Sh. Vibhu Jain, Advocate Sh. Amarbir Singh Walia, CA Respondent by Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR Date of hearing 17.02.2023 Date of pronouncement 28.02.2023 ORDER PER SAKTIJIT DEY, JM: This is an appeal by t…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE vs. M/S INFOSYS LIMITED , BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee as well as by revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 809/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariit(Tp)A No.735/Bang/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Padam Chand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Sreenivas T. Bidari, D.R
Section 11Section 14ASection 194JSection 234BSection 40Section 80J

…a)(ia) for not deducting tax at source in respect of the said payments under section 195. Reliance has been placed on the decision of the Karnataka High Court in Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd and others decision dated 24.9.2009 (1st decision) reported in [2010] 320 ITR 209 in support of the impugned conclusion. 53. The learned CIT(A) held in favour of the assessee by relying on the decision of the ITAT in assessee’s own case for AY 2006-07 [IT(TP)A No. 799/Bang/2015 dated 10.11.2017]. 54. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. This issue came for consideration before th…

M/S INFOSYS LTD ,BANGALOR E vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee as well as by revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 735/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariit(Tp)A No.735/Bang/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Padam Chand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Sreenivas T. Bidari, D.R
Section 11Section 14ASection 194JSection 234BSection 40Section 80J

…a)(ia) for not deducting tax at source in respect of the said payments under section 195. Reliance has been placed on the decision of the Karnataka High Court in Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd and others decision dated 24.9.2009 (1st decision) reported in [2010] 320 ITR 209 in support of the impugned conclusion. 53. The learned CIT(A) held in favour of the assessee by relying on the decision of the ITAT in assessee’s own case for AY 2006-07 [IT(TP)A No. 799/Bang/2015 dated 10.11.2017]. 54. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. This issue came for consideration before th…

ACIT(IT), CIRCLE - 1(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. IXIA TECHNOLOGIES INTERNATIONAL LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed”

ITA 6/KOL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 6/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax(It)...Appellant Circle-1(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawanpoorva, 110, Shantipally, Kolkata-700107 -Vs.- Ixia Technologies International Limited,..Respondent Plot No. Y-14, Block-Ep, Sector-V, Salt Lake Electronics Complex, Bidhan Nagar, Kolkata-700091 [Pan: Aacci3401L] Appearances By: Shri Amal Kamat, Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Shri Rahul Saha, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee

Section 250Section 9(1)(vi)

…ITA No. 6/KOL/2020 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Ixia Technologies International Limited IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ) & Shri Rajesh Kumar,Accountant Member I.T.A. No. 6/KOL/2020 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax(IT)...Appellant Circle-1(2), Kolkata, Aayakar BhawanPoorva, 110, Shantipally, Kolkata-700107 -Vs.- Ixia Technologies International Limited,..Respondent Plot No. Y-14, Block-EP, Sector-V, Salt Lake Electronics Complex, Bidhan Nagar, Kolkata-700091 [PAN: AACCI3401L] Appearances by: Shri Amal Kamat, CIT,…

M/S INFOSYS LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 718/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojaria & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Appeal No. Appellant Respondent Year M/S. Infosys Ltd., The Assistant Electronic City, Commissioner It(Tp)A No. Hosur Road, Of Income Tax, 2012-13 718/Bang/2017 Bangalore – 560 Circle – 100. 3(1)(1), Pan: Bangalore. Aaaci4798L : Shri Padamchand Khincha, Assessee By Ca : Shri K.V. Arvind & Shri Dilip, Revenue By Standing Counsels For Dept. Date Of Hearing : 15-09-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 28-11-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Arises Out Of Final Assessment Order Dated 28/02/2017 Passed By The Ld.Acit, Circle – 3(1)(1), Bangalore For A.Y. 2012-13 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: General & Legal Grounds 1. The Order Passed By The Learned Assessing Officer & The Directions Of Hon’Ble Drp To The Extent Prejudicial To The Appellant Is Bad In Law & Liable To Be Quashed. Grounds On Denial Of Deduction Claimed Under Section 10Aa In Respect Of 4 Sez Units Viz., Chennai – Unit 1, Chandigarh, Mangalore - Unit 1 & Pune Unit 1 2. The Learned Assessing Officer Has Erred In Denying Deduction Claimed Under Section 10Aa In The Return Of Income Totally Amounting To Rs. 2227,82,65,630 In Respect

Section 10ASection 14ASection 2Section 2(24)Section 40

…h section 6 of the Act. Hence, no tax was deducted at source in respect of the commission paid to these non residents. 13.2. The Ld.AO relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in case of CIT v Samsung Electronics Co Ltd., reported in (2010) 320 ITR 209 held that, the assessee should have either made TDS on commission paid or should have obtained an exemption certificate from the IT Dept. It was held that, in the absence of action taken on both these counts, commission paid is liable for disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the IT Act. 13.3. The DRP referred to its own directions for AY 2010-…

NOVELL INC,AMERICA vs. DCIT (IT) RANGE 3(3)(1), MUMBAI

The appeal is partly allowed

ITA 7280/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Us.

For Appellant: Shri Ninad PatadeFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 195Section 234ASection 234BSection 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "I" BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Micro Focus Software Inc. (Formerly known as Novell Inc.), 1800, South Novell Palace, Provo Utah 84606, United States of America ……………… Appellant [PAN: AABCN5034F] The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Vs (IT), Range-3(3)(1), Mumbai, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400021 ……………. Respondent Appearances For the Appellant/Assessee : Shri Ninad Patade Shri Abdul Kadir Jawadwala For the Respondent/Department : Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash Date of conclusion of hearing : 12.07.20…

Showing 1–20 of 244 · Page 1 of 13

...