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).

How many judgments cite CIT v. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft?

259 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft (310 ITR 320), spanning 2012 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 9(1)(vi), Section 9(1)(vii), Section 14(a)/14(b) of the Copyrights Act, Section 144C(13), Section 144C(5).

CIT v. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft (310 ITR 320)

Lahmeyer Holding Gmbh, Germany vs. DDIT, New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 5799/DEL/2010[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2019AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[Assessment Year: 2001-02] M/S Lahmeyer International Acit, Gmbh, Circle-2(1), C/O- Lahmeyer International International Taxation, (India) Private Limited, Drum Shaped Building, Intec House, 37, Institutional New Delhi Area, Sector-44, Gurgaon- 122002 Pan-Aaacl6802E Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2002-03] Lahmeyear Holding Gmbh Dcit, (Earlier Known As Lahmeyer Circle-3(2), International Gmbh), International Taxation, Friedberger Strasse 173 6118 New Delhi Bad Vilbel, Deutschland Germany Pan-Aaacl6802E Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2003-04] M/S Lahmeyer International Acit, Gmbh, Circle-2(1), C/O- Lahmeyer International International Taxation, (India) Private Limited, Drum Shaped Building, Intec House, 37, Institutional New Delhi Area, Sector-44, Gurgaon-

Section 115ASection 144CSection 147Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 271(1)(c)Section 44D

…f reimbursement of expenses, the Ld. AR submitted that there is no finding that the reimbursement had any element of income or there was any markup. He submitted that the issue is covered by the decision in the case of CIT v. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft (2009) 310 ITR 320; Abbey Business Services (India) (P) Ltd. v. DCIT (2012) 53 SOT 401. The Ld. AR submitted are as per the contracts, the payer or the Indian entity is responsible to pay after deducting tax. Most of the contracts are with Govt./Govt. Enterprises. Hence, the assessee is not liable to tax and it can’t be alleged that the agreements are entered to av…

M/S Lahmeyer International Gmbh, Gurgaon vs. ADIT, New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 2125/DEL/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[Assessment Year: 2001-02] M/S Lahmeyer International Acit, Gmbh, Circle-2(1), C/O- Lahmeyer International International Taxation, (India) Private Limited, Drum Shaped Building, Intec House, 37, Institutional New Delhi Area, Sector-44, Gurgaon- 122002 Pan-Aaacl6802E Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2002-03] Lahmeyear Holding Gmbh Dcit, (Earlier Known As Lahmeyer Circle-3(2), International Gmbh), International Taxation, Friedberger Strasse 173 6118 New Delhi Bad Vilbel, Deutschland Germany Pan-Aaacl6802E Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2003-04] M/S Lahmeyer International Acit, Gmbh, Circle-2(1), C/O- Lahmeyer International International Taxation, (India) Private Limited, Drum Shaped Building, Intec House, 37, Institutional New Delhi Area, Sector-44, Gurgaon-

Section 115ASection 144CSection 147Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 271(1)(c)Section 44D

…f reimbursement of expenses, the Ld. AR submitted that there is no finding that the reimbursement had any element of income or there was any markup. He submitted that the issue is covered by the decision in the case of CIT v. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft (2009) 310 ITR 320; Abbey Business Services (India) (P) Ltd. v. DCIT (2012) 53 SOT 401. The Ld. AR submitted are as per the contracts, the payer or the Indian entity is responsible to pay after deducting tax. Most of the contracts are with Govt./Govt. Enterprises. Hence, the assessee is not liable to tax and it can’t be alleged that the agreements are entered to av…

M/S Lahmeyer International Gmbh, Gurgaon vs. DDIT, New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 2124/DEL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[Assessment Year: 2001-02] M/S Lahmeyer International Acit, Gmbh, Circle-2(1), C/O- Lahmeyer International International Taxation, (India) Private Limited, Drum Shaped Building, Intec House, 37, Institutional New Delhi Area, Sector-44, Gurgaon- 122002 Pan-Aaacl6802E Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2002-03] Lahmeyear Holding Gmbh Dcit, (Earlier Known As Lahmeyer Circle-3(2), International Gmbh), International Taxation, Friedberger Strasse 173 6118 New Delhi Bad Vilbel, Deutschland Germany Pan-Aaacl6802E Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2003-04] M/S Lahmeyer International Acit, Gmbh, Circle-2(1), C/O- Lahmeyer International International Taxation, (India) Private Limited, Drum Shaped Building, Intec House, 37, Institutional New Delhi Area, Sector-44, Gurgaon-

Section 115ASection 144CSection 147Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 271(1)(c)Section 44D

…f reimbursement of expenses, the Ld. AR submitted that there is no finding that the reimbursement had any element of income or there was any markup. He submitted that the issue is covered by the decision in the case of CIT v. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft (2009) 310 ITR 320; Abbey Business Services (India) (P) Ltd. v. DCIT (2012) 53 SOT 401. The Ld. AR submitted are as per the contracts, the payer or the Indian entity is responsible to pay after deducting tax. Most of the contracts are with Govt./Govt. Enterprises. Hence, the assessee is not liable to tax and it can’t be alleged that the agreements are entered to av…

Lehmeyer International Gmbh vs. DCIT Circle 1 (2)

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1881/DEL/2007[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2019AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[Assessment Year: 2001-02] M/S Lahmeyer International Acit, Gmbh, Circle-2(1), C/O- Lahmeyer International International Taxation, (India) Private Limited, Drum Shaped Building, Intec House, 37, Institutional New Delhi Area, Sector-44, Gurgaon- 122002 Pan-Aaacl6802E Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2002-03] Lahmeyear Holding Gmbh Dcit, (Earlier Known As Lahmeyer Circle-3(2), International Gmbh), International Taxation, Friedberger Strasse 173 6118 New Delhi Bad Vilbel, Deutschland Germany Pan-Aaacl6802E Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2003-04] M/S Lahmeyer International Acit, Gmbh, Circle-2(1), C/O- Lahmeyer International International Taxation, (India) Private Limited, Drum Shaped Building, Intec House, 37, Institutional New Delhi Area, Sector-44, Gurgaon-

Section 115ASection 144CSection 147Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 271(1)(c)Section 44D

…f reimbursement of expenses, the Ld. AR submitted that there is no finding that the reimbursement had any element of income or there was any markup. He submitted that the issue is covered by the decision in the case of CIT v. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft (2009) 310 ITR 320; Abbey Business Services (India) (P) Ltd. v. DCIT (2012) 53 SOT 401. The Ld. AR submitted are as per the contracts, the payer or the Indian entity is responsible to pay after deducting tax. Most of the contracts are with Govt./Govt. Enterprises. Hence, the assessee is not liable to tax and it can’t be alleged that the agreements are entered to av…

Lahmeyer International Gmbh vs. ADIT, Circle-2(!)

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 4960/DEL/2004[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2019AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[Assessment Year: 2001-02] M/S Lahmeyer International Acit, Gmbh, Circle-2(1), C/O- Lahmeyer International International Taxation, (India) Private Limited, Drum Shaped Building, Intec House, 37, Institutional New Delhi Area, Sector-44, Gurgaon- 122002 Pan-Aaacl6802E Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2002-03] Lahmeyear Holding Gmbh Dcit, (Earlier Known As Lahmeyer Circle-3(2), International Gmbh), International Taxation, Friedberger Strasse 173 6118 New Delhi Bad Vilbel, Deutschland Germany Pan-Aaacl6802E Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2003-04] M/S Lahmeyer International Acit, Gmbh, Circle-2(1), C/O- Lahmeyer International International Taxation, (India) Private Limited, Drum Shaped Building, Intec House, 37, Institutional New Delhi Area, Sector-44, Gurgaon-

Section 115ASection 144CSection 147Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 271(1)(c)Section 44D

…f reimbursement of expenses, the Ld. AR submitted that there is no finding that the reimbursement had any element of income or there was any markup. He submitted that the issue is covered by the decision in the case of CIT v. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft (2009) 310 ITR 320; Abbey Business Services (India) (P) Ltd. v. DCIT (2012) 53 SOT 401. The Ld. AR submitted are as per the contracts, the payer or the Indian entity is responsible to pay after deducting tax. Most of the contracts are with Govt./Govt. Enterprises. Hence, the assessee is not liable to tax and it can’t be alleged that the agreements are entered to av…

M/S.Sandvik Tooling Sverige Ab, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, (International Taxation) Circle - 2, Pune

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 2523/PUN/2017[AAKCS4689N]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Aug 2019

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2523/Pun/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15

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

…rovision, 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 jurisdictional 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. Here, it is made clear that the provisions of sub-section (2A) of section 90 inserted by the…

Aveva Information Technology India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT-9(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 2176/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri G. Manjunatha, Am Aveva Information Technology Vs. Dcit-9(1) India Pvt.Ltd. Aaykar Bhawan, M.K.Road Unit No.202, ‘A’ Wing Mumbai-400 020 2Nd Floor, Supreme Business Park, Supreme City, Behind Lake Cstle, Hiranandani Gardens, Powai, Mumbai-400 076 Pan/Gir No.Aadca0847M Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 143(2)Section 195Section 234BSection 234CSection 271(1)(c)Section 40Section 9

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JM & SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, AM Aveva Information Technology Vs. DCIT-9(1) India Pvt.Ltd. Aaykar Bhawan, M.K.Road Unit No.202, ‘A’ Wing Mumbai-400 020 2nd Floor, Supreme Business Park, Supreme City, Behind Lake Cstle, Hiranandani Gardens, Powai, Mumbai-400 076 PAN/GIR No.AADCA0847M Appellant) .. Respondent) Assessee by Nitesh Joshi & Shivani Kotadia Revenue by Dr.Narendra Kumar Date of Hearing 20/06/2019 Date of Pronouncement 26/07/2019 आदेश आदेश / O R D E R आदेश आदेश PER G.MANJUNATHA (A.M): This appeal filed by the assessee is dir…

Amadeus Global Travel Distribution Sa, Spain vs. ADIT, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed with above direction

ITA 1494/DEL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jul 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishiamadeus Global Travel Vs. Adit, Distribution Sa Circle-1(1), (Now Known As Amadeus It International Taxation, Group Sa), New Delhi Salvador De Madariaga, E- 28027, Madrid, Spain Pan: Aafca9629P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri G. K. Dhall, CIT DR

Section 80HSection 9

…It would impact those cases where the transaction has been routed through low tax or no tax countries with whom India does not have a DTAA.‖ Further, reference is made to the decision of the Mumbai High Court in the case of CIT vs. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft: 310 ITR 320, wherein it was held that by an unilateral amendment it is not possible for one nation to tax income which otherwise was not subject to tax under the relevant Tax Treaty. Further, the Delhi High Court in the case of DIT vs. Nokia Network OY: ITA No. 359 of 2005, after considering the retrospective amendment to section 9(1)(vi) of the Act by Fina…

Hsbc Bank Plc, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 2(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed, as above

ITA 7386/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ram Lal Negi: A.Y : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Farrokh Irani &For Respondent: Shri S. Anbuselvan &

Section 143(3)Section 234B

…annot be treated as 4 HSBC Bank Plc income in the hands of the assessee. In support of his contentions, the Learned Representative relied on the following judgments : i) DIT (IT) v. A P Moller Maersk AS, 392 ITR 186 (SC) ii) CIT v. Siemens Aktiongeselschaft, 310 ITR 320 (Bom) 6. The ld. DR appearing for the Revenue, on the other hand, relied upon the orders of the authorities below and submitted that the onus is on the assessee to produce all the evidences of expenditure and that this onus is clearly not discharged by the assessee. 7. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the material…

Raskspace Us Inc, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 4(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, these appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above

ITA 3507/MUM/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: S/Shri PJ PardiwalaFor Respondent: S/Shri Kumar Sanjay, CIT DR &

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 9Section 9(1)(vi)

…he read into the treaty to determine the nature of payment as Royalty under the DTAA. We have considered the decisions relied by appellant in support of this contention including the decision of jurisdictional high court in case of Siemens Aktiengesellschaft 310 ITR 320(3om). It is noted that the retrospective amendment in explanation 5 has only clarified the meaning of Royalty. It has not a: all expanded the scope of royalty. The clarification was made to remove the conflicting views on effect of location/possession/control/delivery/use of the royalty rights etc. by the user in India without Rackspace, US Inc…

Rackspace, Us Inc., Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 4(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, these appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above

ITA 1075/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: S/Shri PJ PardiwalaFor Respondent: S/Shri Kumar Sanjay, CIT DR &

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 9Section 9(1)(vi)

…he read into the treaty to determine the nature of payment as Royalty under the DTAA. We have considered the decisions relied by appellant in support of this contention including the decision of jurisdictional high court in case of Siemens Aktiengesellschaft 310 ITR 320(3om). It is noted that the retrospective amendment in explanation 5 has only clarified the meaning of Royalty. It has not a: all expanded the scope of royalty. The clarification was made to remove the conflicting views on effect of location/possession/control/delivery/use of the royalty rights etc. by the user in India without Rackspace, US Inc…

Rackspace, Us Inc, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 4(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, these appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above

ITA 1634/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: S/Shri PJ PardiwalaFor Respondent: S/Shri Kumar Sanjay, CIT DR &

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 9Section 9(1)(vi)

…he read into the treaty to determine the nature of payment as Royalty under the DTAA. We have considered the decisions relied by appellant in support of this contention including the decision of jurisdictional high court in case of Siemens Aktiengesellschaft 310 ITR 320(3om). It is noted that the retrospective amendment in explanation 5 has only clarified the meaning of Royalty. It has not a: all expanded the scope of royalty. The clarification was made to remove the conflicting views on effect of location/possession/control/delivery/use of the royalty rights etc. by the user in India without Rackspace, US Inc…

The Nielsen Company (Us) Llc, Mumbai vs. DDIT (It) 4(2), Mumbai

In the result the Ground No

ITA 4362/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Pawan Singhthe Nielsen Company (Us) Dcit (It) - 4(2) Llc, C/O Nielsen (India) Pvt. Mumbai. Ltd., 6Th Floor, Block-C, Godrej Vs. It Park, 02 Godrej Business, District, Phirojshah Nagar, Lbs Marg, Vikhroli (W), Mumbai-400079. Pan: Aacfj7526Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri P.J. Pardiwala With Sh. Madhur Agrawal (Ars) Respondent By : Shri Himanshu Sharma & Sh. Nishant Samaiya (Sr. Drs)

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwala with ShFor Respondent: Shri Himanshu Sharma and Sh. Nishant Samaiya (Sr. DRs)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(3)Section 234BSection 253Section 254(1)

…ee for such services. The services were allocated to the group company on the basis of number of expat employee in the entity on prorate basis. In support of his submissions the ld. AR relied on the decision of Bombay High Court in Siemens Aktiongesellschaft 310 ITR 320 (Bom). 26. On the other hand the ld. DR for the revenue relied on the order of the authorities below. 27. We have considered the rival submissions of the parties and have gone through the orders of the lower authorities. During the assessment the assessing officer noted that the assessee received Rs. 4,98,576/- from ACNOM, which was not included…

DCIT (It) 4(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Reliance Jio Infocomm Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 936/MUM/2017[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 May 2019AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Ravish Sooddeputy Commissioner Of Income M/S Reliance Jio Infocomm Ltd., Tax (It)-4(1)(1), 9Th Floor, Maker Chambers Iv, Room No.- 1712, 222 Nariman Point, Vs. Air India Building, Mumbai – 400 021 Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400021 Pan – Aabci6363G (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Samaiya, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Moti Lala &

Section 195Section 195ASection 248

…5 of 2016, dated 05.02.2019). The Hon‟ble High Court in its aforesaid judgment had after referring to the judgments of the Hon‟ble High Court of Delhi in the case of DIT Vs. New Skies Satellite BV (2016) 382 ITR 114 (Del) and CIT Vs. Aktiongesellschaft (2009) 310 ITR 320 (Del), had after deliberating on the amendment made available on the statute by the Explanation 6 to Sec. 9(1)(vi), observed that mere amendment in the I-T Act would not override the provisions of DTAA treaties. In the backdrop of our aforesaid observations, we shall now further deliberate on the definition of „royalty‟ as contemplated in the Ind…

Lxia Technologies Limited, Kolkata vs. ACIT, (I.T.) Cir.-1(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 313/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.313/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2013-14)

For Appellant: Shri Prashant Mehar Chandani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. P. K. Srihari, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 9(1)

…: "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 Vs. 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." 22. Further, in a recent judgment in the case of "DIT v New Skies Satellite BV" [2016] 382 ITR 144/238 Taxman 577/68 taxmann.com 8 (Delhi), the Ho…

Shri Jogendra L. Bhati, Ahmedabad vs. Dy. CIT, Circle-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2136/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2136/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Shri Jogendra L. Bhati Dcit, Cir.3(1)(1) 315, Nilkanth Palace-B Vs Ahmedabad. 100 Ft. Road Anandnagar Road Satellite Ahmedabad 380 015. Pan : Ahcpn 0228 N अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.N. Soparkar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR

Section 143(2)Section 195Section 40Section 9

…& Mahindra Ltd., in ITA No.2811/MUM/2003 has held that in respect of reimbursement of expenses, there is no obligation to deduct tax at source. For this conclusion, ITAT has relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Siemens. 310 ITR 320 (Bom); ABB Ltd., In re, 322 ITR 564 (AAR) and ITO ITA No.2136 /Ahd/2017 (Intl. Taxation) Vs. Prasad Productions Ltd., 125 ITD 263 (Chennai)(SB). Copy of this decision has been placed on page no.247. 13. At the time of hearing, the ld.counsel for the assessee relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court also in the case of Economic Trad…

M/S. Dolphin Drilling Pte. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ADIT, Dehradun

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

ITA 355/DEL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuassessment Year: 2007-08

Section 143(3)Section 92C

…) • CIT v. Dunlop Rubber Co. Ltd.: 142 ITR 493 (Cal) • CIT vs. DLF Commercial Project Corporation: ITA 627/2012 and 507/2013 (Del.) • CIT vs. Gujarat Narmada Valley Fertilizers Co. Ltd.: [2014] 361 ITR 192 (Gujarat) • CIT v. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft: [2009] 310 ITR 320 (Bombay) • CIT v. Microsoft Corporation Of India (P) Limited: 220 CTR 425 (Del) • CIT vs. Fortis Healthcare Ltd: 181 Taxman 257 (Del) • C.I.T. vs. Stewards and Llyods, 165 ITR 416 (Cal) • CIT vs. Sundwiger Emfg. & Co.: 262 ITR 116 (AP) • Mahindra & Mahindra: 313 ITR (AT) 263 (SB)(MUM) • Coca Cola India Inc. v. ACIT: (2006) 7 SOT 224 (Del) • Cliff…

John Deere Eqipment P. Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Director of Income-Tax

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 908/PUN/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jan 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.905 & 906/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2007-08 & 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: S/Shri Ajay Modi, Pankaj Garg and Sudhendu Das

Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vi)

…tion or service which was otherwise taxed in terms of DTAA, or which was subject to lower rate of tax mandated by a treaty. Reliance in this regard was placed on the ratio laid down by the Hon‘ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Seimens Aktiongesellschaft (2009) 310 ITR 320 (Bom) and the Hon‘ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh in Sanofi Pasteur Holding SA Vs. Dept. of Revenue and Others (2013) 354 ITR 316 (AP). Reliance was also placed on the ratio laid down by the Hon‘ble High Court of Delhi in DIT Vs. Nokia Networks OY (2013) 358 ITR 259 (Del), wherein the context was the efficacy of interpretation given to Statute i…

John Deere Eqipment P. Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Director of Income-Tax

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 907/PUN/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jan 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.905 & 906/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2007-08 & 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: S/Shri Ajay Modi, Pankaj Garg and Sudhendu Das

Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vi)

…tion or service which was otherwise taxed in terms of DTAA, or which was subject to lower rate of tax mandated by a treaty. Reliance in this regard was placed on the ratio laid down by the Hon‘ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Seimens Aktiongesellschaft (2009) 310 ITR 320 (Bom) and the Hon‘ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh in Sanofi Pasteur Holding SA Vs. Dept. of Revenue and Others (2013) 354 ITR 316 (AP). Reliance was also placed on the ratio laid down by the Hon‘ble High Court of Delhi in DIT Vs. Nokia Networks OY (2013) 358 ITR 259 (Del), wherein the context was the efficacy of interpretation given to Statute i…

John Deere India Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Director of Income-Tax

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 906/PUN/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jan 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.905 & 906/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2007-08 & 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: S/Shri Ajay Modi, Pankaj Garg and Sudhendu Das

Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vi)

…tion or service which was otherwise taxed in terms of DTAA, or which was subject to lower rate of tax mandated by a treaty. Reliance in this regard was placed on the ratio laid down by the Hon‘ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Seimens Aktiongesellschaft (2009) 310 ITR 320 (Bom) and the Hon‘ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh in Sanofi Pasteur Holding SA Vs. Dept. of Revenue and Others (2013) 354 ITR 316 (AP). Reliance was also placed on the ratio laid down by the Hon‘ble High Court of Delhi in DIT Vs. Nokia Networks OY (2013) 358 ITR 259 (Del), wherein the context was the efficacy of interpretation given to Statute i…

CIT v. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft

What is CIT v. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft authority for?

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft

Lahmeyer Holding Gmbh, Germany vs. DDIT, New Delhi

M/S Lahmeyer International Gmbh, Gurgaon vs. ADIT, New Delhi

M/S Lahmeyer International Gmbh, Gurgaon vs. DDIT, New Delhi

Lehmeyer International Gmbh vs. DCIT Circle 1 (2)

Lahmeyer International Gmbh vs. ADIT, Circle-2(!)

M/S.Sandvik Tooling Sverige Ab, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, (International Taxation) Circle - 2, Pune

Aveva Information Technology India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT-9(1), Mumbai

Amadeus Global Travel Distribution Sa, Spain vs. ADIT, New Delhi

Hsbc Bank Plc, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 2(2)(2), Mumbai

Raskspace Us Inc, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 4(1)(1), Mumbai

Rackspace, Us Inc., Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 4(1)(1), Mumbai

Rackspace, Us Inc, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 4(1)(1), Mumbai

The Nielsen Company (Us) Llc, Mumbai vs. DDIT (It) 4(2), Mumbai

DCIT (It) 4(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Reliance Jio Infocomm Ltd, Mumbai

Lxia Technologies Limited, Kolkata vs. ACIT, (I.T.) Cir.-1(2), Kolkata

Shri Jogendra L. Bhati, Ahmedabad vs. Dy. CIT, Circle-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad

M/S. Dolphin Drilling Pte. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ADIT, Dehradun

John Deere Eqipment P. Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Director of Income-Tax

John Deere Eqipment P. Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Director of Income-Tax

John Deere India Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Director of Income-Tax