CIT v. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft

310 ITR 320High Court2009#324 most cited

What is CIT v. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft authority for?

Reimbursements of actual expenses without any profit element are not taxable income. Additionally, mere amendments to the Income-tax Act do not override the provisions of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements (DTAAs).

259

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,368 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft · 310 ITR 320 · reimbursements not taxable · no profit element · Section 9(1)(vi) · Section 9(1)(vii) · Section 195 · Section 90(2) · DTAA override · withholding tax on FTS royalty · fees for technical services · royalty income

Also reported as

177 Taxmann 81220 CTR 425

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 9(1)(vi)Section 9(1)(vii)Section 14(a)/14(b) of the Copyrights ActSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 195Section 1961

Issues it is cited on

section 195(2)fees for included servicessection 44bbsection 9(1)(vi)section 44bwithholding taxcopyrighted articleroyalty incomesection 90(2)section 9(1)fees for technical servicespermanent establishment

Judgments citing CIT v. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft

Asstt. CIT (It)-4(3)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Viacom 18 Media P. Ltd., Mumbai

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

ITA 1088/MUM/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Feb 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Nimesh Vora, ARFor Respondent: Shri Milind S. Chavan, SR DR
Section 195Section 9

…and submitted that tax is required to withhold on these payments, as those are chargeable to tax in India. To support his argument, he relied up on the decision of Commissioner of Income-tax Vs Siemens Aktiongesellschaft [2009] 177 Taxman 81 (Bombay)/ [2009] 310 ITR 320 (Bombay). He submitted that based on this decision ITAT in case of the assessee in [2014] 44 taxmann.com 1 (Mumbai)/ [2015] 153 ITD 384 (Mumbai) has decided that Transponder fee is chargeable to tax in India. He referred to 3 | P a g e the DTAA of India and Malaysia and referred to Article 12 of that agreement to state that such royalties may als…

Asstt. CIT (It)-4(3)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Viacom 18 Media P. Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 1067/MUM/2021[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Feb 2022AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Nimesh Vora, ARFor Respondent: Shri Milind S. Chavan, SR DR
Section 195Section 9

…and submitted that tax is required to withhold on these payments, as those are chargeable to tax in India. To support his argument, he relied up on the decision of Commissioner of Income-tax Vs Siemens Aktiongesellschaft [2009] 177 Taxman 81 (Bombay)/ [2009] 310 ITR 320 (Bombay). He submitted that based on this decision ITAT in case of the assessee in [2014] 44 taxmann.com 1 (Mumbai)/ [2015] 153 ITD 384 (Mumbai) has decided that Transponder fee is chargeable to tax in India. He referred to 3 | P a g e the DTAA of India and Malaysia and referred to Article 12 of that agreement to state that such royalties may als…

M/S.Nds Limited, Bangalore vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

ITA 364/BANG/2017[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Dec 2021AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri. B.R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(It)A No. 364/Bang/2017 Assessment Year : 2007-08 M/S. Synamedia Ltd. [Formerly Known As ‘Nds Limited’], The Assistant C/O. M/S. Synamedia India Pvt. Commissioner Of Ltd., Income Tax, Block 9A & 9B, Pritech Park, International Survey No. 51-64/4, Taxation, Sarjapur Outer Ring Road, Vs. Circle – 1(2), Bellandur Village, Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 103. Pan: Aabcn2524L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sharath Rao, Advocate : Shri Dilip, Standing Revenue By Counsel For Dept. Date Of Hearing : 16-12-2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 28-12-2021

For Appellant: Shri
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234B

…se. However, the above argument misses the vital point namely the assessee has opted to be governed by the treaty and the language of the said treaty differs from the amended Section 9 of the Act. It is categorically held in CIT v. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft, 310 ITR 320 (Bom) that the amendments cannot be read into the treaty. On the wording of the treaty, we have already held in Ericsson (supra) that a copyrighted article does not fall within the purview of Royalty. Therefore, we decide question of law no. 1 & 2 in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.” The High Court then followed its own judgment i…

Chander Mohan Lal, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle - 61(1), New Delhi

ITA 1869/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Dec 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar[Assessment Year: 2015-16]

Section 194CSection 40A(2)

…unlop Rubber Co. Ltd.: (1983) 142 ITR 493 (Cal) ii. ABB Ltd.: 322 ITR 564 iii. ITO v. CGI Information Systems in ITA No. 1376/Bang iv. ACIT vs. Modicon Network: 14 SOT 204 v. CIT vs. Fortis Healthcare Ltd: 181 Taxman 257 vi. CIT v. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft: 220 CTR 425 vii. C.I.T. vs. Stewards and Llyods, 165 ITR 416 (Cal) viii. CIT vs. Sundwiger Emfg. & Co.: 262 ITR 116 (AP) ix. Mahindra & Mahindra: 313 ITR (AT) 263 (SB)(MUM) x. Coca Cola India Inc. v. ACIT: (2006) 7 SOT 224 (Del) xi. Clifford Chance v. DCIT: 82 ITD 106 (Mum) xii. Hyder Consulting Ltd. v. CIT: 236 ITR 640 (AAR) xiii. DECTA v. CIT: 237 ITR 190…

J and P Coats Limited, Bangaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation), Circle 1(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals are allowed

ITA 1367/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Rotti, CAFor Respondent: Shri K. V. Arvind, Standing Counsel for Department
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

…ely makes use of the facility, though he does not himself use the equipment. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of DIT v. New Skies Satellite BV [2016] 68 taxmann.com 8/238 Taxman 577/382 ITR 114 and CIT v. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft [2009] 177 Taxman 8/310 ITR 320 (Bom.) have also taken similar view in the context of use of transponder facility. This view has been affirmed by the Mumbai ITAT in the case of Dy. CIT v. Reliance Jio Infocomm Ltd. [2019] 108 taxmann.com 325 (Mum.), wherein it has been held that u/s.9(1)(vi) of the Act, payment for 'bandwidth services' is not assessable as 'royalty' if the Asse…

J and P Coats Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation), Circle 1(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals are allowed

ITA 1366/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Rotti, CAFor Respondent: Shri K. V. Arvind, Standing Counsel for Department
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

…ely makes use of the facility, though he does not himself use the equipment. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of DIT v. New Skies Satellite BV [2016] 68 taxmann.com 8/238 Taxman 577/382 ITR 114 and CIT v. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft [2009] 177 Taxman 8/310 ITR 320 (Bom.) have also taken similar view in the context of use of transponder facility. This view has been affirmed by the Mumbai ITAT in the case of Dy. CIT v. Reliance Jio Infocomm Ltd. [2019] 108 taxmann.com 325 (Mum.), wherein it has been held that u/s.9(1)(vi) of the Act, payment for 'bandwidth services' is not assessable as 'royalty' if the Asse…

J and P Coats Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation), Circle 1(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals are allowed

ITA 1365/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Rotti, CAFor Respondent: Shri K. V. Arvind, Standing Counsel for Department
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

…ely makes use of the facility, though he does not himself use the equipment. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of DIT v. New Skies Satellite BV [2016] 68 taxmann.com 8/238 Taxman 577/382 ITR 114 and CIT v. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft [2009] 177 Taxman 8/310 ITR 320 (Bom.) have also taken similar view in the context of use of transponder facility. This view has been affirmed by the Mumbai ITAT in the case of Dy. CIT v. Reliance Jio Infocomm Ltd. [2019] 108 taxmann.com 325 (Mum.), wherein it has been held that u/s.9(1)(vi) of the Act, payment for 'bandwidth services' is not assessable as 'royalty' if the Asse…

J & P Coats Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals are allowed

ITA 2135/BANG/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Rotti, CAFor Respondent: Shri K. V. Arvind, Standing Counsel for Department
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

…ely makes use of the facility, though he does not himself use the equipment. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of DIT v. New Skies Satellite BV [2016] 68 taxmann.com 8/238 Taxman 577/382 ITR 114 and CIT v. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft [2009] 177 Taxman 8/310 ITR 320 (Bom.) have also taken similar view in the context of use of transponder facility. This view has been affirmed by the Mumbai ITAT in the case of Dy. CIT v. Reliance Jio Infocomm Ltd. [2019] 108 taxmann.com 325 (Mum.), wherein it has been held that u/s.9(1)(vi) of the Act, payment for 'bandwidth services' is not assessable as 'royalty' if the Asse…

J & P Coats Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals are allowed

ITA 382/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Rotti, CAFor Respondent: Shri K. V. Arvind, Standing Counsel for Department
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

…ely makes use of the facility, though he does not himself use the equipment. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of DIT v. New Skies Satellite BV [2016] 68 taxmann.com 8/238 Taxman 577/382 ITR 114 and CIT v. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft [2009] 177 Taxman 8/310 ITR 320 (Bom.) have also taken similar view in the context of use of transponder facility. This view has been affirmed by the Mumbai ITAT in the case of Dy. CIT v. Reliance Jio Infocomm Ltd. [2019] 108 taxmann.com 325 (Mum.), wherein it has been held that u/s.9(1)(vi) of the Act, payment for 'bandwidth services' is not assessable as 'royalty' if the Asse…

J & P Coats Limited, U.K vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals are allowed

ITA 1493/BANG/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Rotti, CAFor Respondent: Shri K. V. Arvind, Standing Counsel for Department
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

…ely makes use of the facility, though he does not himself use the equipment. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of DIT v. New Skies Satellite BV [2016] 68 taxmann.com 8/238 Taxman 577/382 ITR 114 and CIT v. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft [2009] 177 Taxman 8/310 ITR 320 (Bom.) have also taken similar view in the context of use of transponder facility. This view has been affirmed by the Mumbai ITAT in the case of Dy. CIT v. Reliance Jio Infocomm Ltd. [2019] 108 taxmann.com 325 (Mum.), wherein it has been held that u/s.9(1)(vi) of the Act, payment for 'bandwidth services' is not assessable as 'royalty' if the Asse…

ACIT, International Taxation, Circle-1(2)(2), New Delhi vs. Datamine International Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 6383/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 6383/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Acit, Vs Datamine International Ltd., International Taxation, (Now Cae Datamine International Circle-1(2)(2), Ltd.), A-41, Ground Floor, Mohan New Delhi Cooperative Industrial Area, Mathura Road, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacd7600A Assessee By : Sh. V. K. Aggarwal, Ar Revenue By : None Date Of Hearing: 29.09.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.11.2021

For Appellant: Sh. V. K. Aggarwal, ARFor Respondent: None
Section 9(1)(vi)

…contrary provision, if any, in DTAA. Such provisions of a DTAA shall prevail over the Act and work as an exception to or modification of sections 4 and 5. Similar view has been taken by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT v. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft (2009) 310 ITR 320 (Bom.). In the light of the above discussion, it becomes vivid that if the provisions of the Treaty are more beneficial to the assessee vis-a-vis its counterpart in the Act, then the assessee shall be entitled to be ruled by the provisions of the Treaty. We have held above that amount from sale of software falls under Article 7 (Business profits)…

Nds Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(2) International Taxation, Bangalore

In the result, all these appeals are partly allowed

ITA 505/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Nov 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year 363/Bang/2017 M/S. Synamedia Limited The Assistant Commissioner Of 2006-07 (Formerly Known As ‘Nds Limited), Income Tax (International Taxation), C/O M/S. Synamedia India Private Circle -1(2), Limited, Bengaluru. Block 9A & 9B, Pritech Park, Survey No.51-64/4, Sarjapur Outer Ring Road, Bellandur Village, Bengaluru – 560 103. Pan : Aabcn 2524 L 504/Bang/2017 -Do- -Do- 2012-13 505/Bang/2017 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 255/Bang/2014 -Do- The Assistant Director Of Income 2010-11 Tax, (International Taxation), Circle – 1(1) [Now Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax (International Taxation), Circle – 1(2), Bengaluru. Appellant By : Shri Sharath Rao, Advocate Respondent By : Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 01.11.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.11.2021

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 9(1)(vi)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI B. R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(IT)A Nos. and Appellant Respondent Assessment Year 363/Bang/2017 M/s. Synamedia Limited The Assistant Commissioner of 2006-07 (formerly known as ‘NDS Limited), Income Tax (International Taxation), C/o M/s. Synamedia India Private Circle -1(2), Limited, Bengaluru. Block 9A and 9B, Pritech Park, Survey No.51-64/4, Sarjapur Outer Ring Road, Bellandur Village, Bengaluru – 560 103. PAN : AABCN 2524 L 504/Bang/2017 -do- -do- 2012-13 505/Bang/2017 -do- -do- 2013-14 255/Bang/…

Nds Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(2) International Taxation, Bangalore

In the result, all these appeals are partly allowed

ITA 504/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Nov 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year 363/Bang/2017 M/S. Synamedia Limited The Assistant Commissioner Of 2006-07 (Formerly Known As ‘Nds Limited), Income Tax (International Taxation), C/O M/S. Synamedia India Private Circle -1(2), Limited, Bengaluru. Block 9A & 9B, Pritech Park, Survey No.51-64/4, Sarjapur Outer Ring Road, Bellandur Village, Bengaluru – 560 103. Pan : Aabcn 2524 L 504/Bang/2017 -Do- -Do- 2012-13 505/Bang/2017 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 255/Bang/2014 -Do- The Assistant Director Of Income 2010-11 Tax, (International Taxation), Circle – 1(1) [Now Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax (International Taxation), Circle – 1(2), Bengaluru. Appellant By : Shri Sharath Rao, Advocate Respondent By : Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 01.11.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.11.2021

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 9(1)(vi)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI B. R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(IT)A Nos. and Appellant Respondent Assessment Year 363/Bang/2017 M/s. Synamedia Limited The Assistant Commissioner of 2006-07 (formerly known as ‘NDS Limited), Income Tax (International Taxation), C/o M/s. Synamedia India Private Circle -1(2), Limited, Bengaluru. Block 9A and 9B, Pritech Park, Survey No.51-64/4, Sarjapur Outer Ring Road, Bellandur Village, Bengaluru – 560 103. PAN : AABCN 2524 L 504/Bang/2017 -do- -do- 2012-13 505/Bang/2017 -do- -do- 2013-14 255/Bang/…

Nds Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(2) International Taxation, Bangalore

In the result, all these appeals are partly allowed

ITA 363/BANG/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Nov 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year 363/Bang/2017 M/S. Synamedia Limited The Assistant Commissioner Of 2006-07 (Formerly Known As ‘Nds Limited), Income Tax (International Taxation), C/O M/S. Synamedia India Private Circle -1(2), Limited, Bengaluru. Block 9A & 9B, Pritech Park, Survey No.51-64/4, Sarjapur Outer Ring Road, Bellandur Village, Bengaluru – 560 103. Pan : Aabcn 2524 L 504/Bang/2017 -Do- -Do- 2012-13 505/Bang/2017 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 255/Bang/2014 -Do- The Assistant Director Of Income 2010-11 Tax, (International Taxation), Circle – 1(1) [Now Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax (International Taxation), Circle – 1(2), Bengaluru. Appellant By : Shri Sharath Rao, Advocate Respondent By : Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 01.11.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.11.2021

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 9(1)(vi)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI B. R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(IT)A Nos. and Appellant Respondent Assessment Year 363/Bang/2017 M/s. Synamedia Limited The Assistant Commissioner of 2006-07 (formerly known as ‘NDS Limited), Income Tax (International Taxation), C/o M/s. Synamedia India Private Circle -1(2), Limited, Bengaluru. Block 9A and 9B, Pritech Park, Survey No.51-64/4, Sarjapur Outer Ring Road, Bellandur Village, Bengaluru – 560 103. PAN : AABCN 2524 L 504/Bang/2017 -do- -do- 2012-13 505/Bang/2017 -do- -do- 2013-14 255/Bang/…

Shell India, Arkets Pvt Ltd. (Successor of Shell Technology India Pvt Ltd.), Mumbai vs. ITO (TDS), Mumbai

In the result, these appeals by the assessee are allowed

ITA 6064/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Sept 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

Section 201Section 6(3)Section 9

…the Static approach while the latter is Dynamic Approach. If the Static Approach is adopted then the very purpose of the DTAA permitting the taxation as per Domestic Law gets defeated and becomes redundant. The Hon. Bombay High Court in the case of Siemens AG 310 ITR 320 (Bombay) has, in para 22 of its judgment has disapproved the Static Approach and stated "22. ...............While considering the DTAA the expression "law in force" would not only include a tax already covered by the treaty but would also include any other tax as taxes of a substantially similar character subsequent to the date of the agreement…

Smit Singapoare Pte Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) Cir 4(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 6588/MUM/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalem/S. Smit Singapore Vs. Dcit (It) – 4(2)(1) 17Th Floor, Room No. Pte Ltd., Srbc & Associates, Llp 1708, Air India 14Th Floor, The Ruby, Building , Nariman 29 Senapati Bapat Marg Point, Mumbai Dadar (W) – 400028. È"ȡ"Ȣ""Ȯ"ȡ" Ȳ"""Ȣ] ^ ] "" Ȳ""Pan/Gir No. : Aaocs1031L Appellant/Respondent .. Respondent/Appellant

For Respondent: Shri S.S. Iyengar, SR DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 44BSection 9(1)(vi)

…ovided by sub-sec (2) of Sec. 90, the provisions of the Act will apply to an assessee in the event they are more beneficial to him. A similar view has been arrived at by the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay CIT Vs. Siemens in the case of Aktionlesellschaft (2009) 310 ITR 320 (Bom). In the said case, it was inter alia observed by the Hon’ble High Court that though provisions of Sec. 9 of the Act would be applicable, however, considering the provisions of the DTAA if beneficial than the provisions of the IT Act, the provisions of DTAA would prevail. 17. In the backdrop of our aforesaid observations, we shall test the c…

M/S Essity Hygiene and Health Ab (Formerly Know As Sca Hygiene Products Ab), Mumbai vs. Dy. CIT (It)-4(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6046/MUM/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 May 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Vice- & Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 6046/मुं/2019 ("न. व.2016-17) M/S. Essity Hygiene & Health Ab, (Formerly Known As Sca Hygiene Products Ab) C/O. Sudik Parekh & Co.Llp, Urmi Axis, 6Th Floor, Famous Studio Lane, Dr. E. Moses Road, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai 400 011 Pan: Aatcs 0899K ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax (It)-4(2)(1) 17Th Floor, Room No.1708, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021. ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Shri Jitendra Jain ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Shri S.S. Iyengar सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 11/02/2021 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 06/05/2021

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra JainFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Iyengar
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)

…element, and, therefore, when a receipt by the assessee is bereft of income element, as a pure reimbursement inherently is, it cannot be brought to tax in the hands of that assessee. Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court, in the case of CIT Vs Siemens AG [(2009) 310 ITR 320 (Bom)], have accepted this proposition and observed as follows: That leaves us with the last contention as to whether the amounts by way of reimbursement are liable to tax. To answer that issue, we may gainfully refer to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court in Industrial Engineering Projects (P.) Ltd.'s case (supra). The learn…

Airport Authority of India, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5163/DEL/2012[2011-12 (F.Y. 2010-11)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 May 2021

Bench: Sh. K. N. Charydr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 5162/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 5163/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Airports Authority Of India, Vs Income Tax Officer(Tds), Rajiv Gandhi Bhavan, Safdarjung Ward-1(1), Airport, New Delhi-110003 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaca6412D Assessee By : Sh. Ashish Gupta, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Sohail Malik, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 24.02.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 04.05.2021

For Appellant: Sh. Ashish Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sohail Malik, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 10(6)(ii)Section 115A

…owing judgments: High Court/AAR • CIT vs Dunlop Rubber Co. Ltd. [142 ITR 493 (Cal)] • Dectavs CIT [23 7 ITR 190 (AAR)] ITA No. 5162 & 5163/Del/2012 28 Airport Authority of India • Tata Engineering & Locomotive Company Limited (2000) 245 ITR 823 • Siemens, 310 ITR 320 (Bom) ITAT • Clifford Chance, 82 ITD 106 (Bom) • Raymond Ltd., 86 ITD 791 (Bom) • Modicon Network, 14 SOT 204 (Del)  It was argued that from the judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court as well as other High Courts that the reimbursement of expenses under no circumstances can be regarded as income. Therefore, in the instant case, what…

Airport Authority of India, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5162/DEL/2012[2010-11 (F.Y. 2009-10)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 May 2021

Bench: Sh. K. N. Charydr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 5162/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 5163/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Airports Authority Of India, Vs Income Tax Officer(Tds), Rajiv Gandhi Bhavan, Safdarjung Ward-1(1), Airport, New Delhi-110003 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaca6412D Assessee By : Sh. Ashish Gupta, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Sohail Malik, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 24.02.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 04.05.2021

For Appellant: Sh. Ashish Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sohail Malik, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 10(6)(ii)Section 115A

…owing judgments: High Court/AAR • CIT vs Dunlop Rubber Co. Ltd. [142 ITR 493 (Cal)] • Dectavs CIT [23 7 ITR 190 (AAR)] ITA No. 5162 & 5163/Del/2012 28 Airport Authority of India • Tata Engineering & Locomotive Company Limited (2000) 245 ITR 823 • Siemens, 310 ITR 320 (Bom) ITAT • Clifford Chance, 82 ITD 106 (Bom) • Raymond Ltd., 86 ITD 791 (Bom) • Modicon Network, 14 SOT 204 (Del)  It was argued that from the judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court as well as other High Courts that the reimbursement of expenses under no circumstances can be regarded as income. Therefore, in the instant case, what…

Inmarsat Global Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT (It)-2(1)92), Mumbai

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

ITA 7485/MUM/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Mar 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shree Manoj Kumar Aggarwalinmarsat Global Ltd., Vs. Dy. Cit(It)-2(1)(2) Ernst & Young Llp, R.No.1612, 17Th Floor, 14Th Floor, Ruby-29, Air India Bldg, Senapati Bapat Marg, Nariman Point, Dadar(W), Mumbai – Mumbai 400002. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaci6098K Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Aarati Sathe, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 271Section 9(1)(vi)

…361 ITR 575 (Mad), the decision of the Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. CGI Information Systems and Management Consultants (P) Ltd. and the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Siemens Aktiongeswellschaft (2009) 310 ITR 320 (Bom). Reliance has been placed on the order of the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Viacom 18 Media P. Ltd. vs. ADIT (International Taxation)-2(2), Mumbai(2014) 44 taxmann.com 1 (Mum-Trib) in support of the argument that this is the view taken by the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal. Notwithstanding the fact that at that point of time the…