CIT v. SR Patton

8 SCC 608Reported decision1998#2221 most cited

What is CIT v. SR Patton authority for?

The Supreme Court holds that the determination of whether an assessee's salary was paid by a foreign company is a question of fact, and an appeal challenging such a factual finding may be dismissed on that ground.

52

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2005 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. SR Patton · 8 SCC 608 · salary paid by foreign company · question of fact · Section 9(1)(ii) · income deemed to accrue or arise · appeal dismissal · Tribunal findings · Supreme Court 1998 · income tax India.

Sections most often in play

Section 14ASection 8DSection 143(3)Section 115JBSection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 250Section 37(1)

Issues it is cited on

section 9(1)(ii)section 17(2)(iiia)section 8d(2)(ii)section 8dsection 14(2)section 17(2)goodwill arising on amalgamationsection 43(6)(c)section 5(b)section 14(1)section 55(2)section 10(33)

Judgments citing CIT v. SR Patton

The DCIT, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Clp India Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 290/AHD/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Nov 2022AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Biren Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri James Kurian, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…Court, but restricted itself to a question of fact viz. whether the Tribunal had correctly found that the salary of the assessee was paid by a foreign company. This Court dismissed the appeal holding that it was a question of fact. (CIT v. S.R. Patton [(1998) 8 SCC 608]). 15. Given this legislative history of Section 9(l)(ii), we can only assume that it was deliberately introduced with effect from 1-4- 2000 and therefore intended to apply prospectively [See CIT v. Pate/ Bros. & Co. Ltd., (1995) 4 SCC 485, 494 (para 18) : (1995) 215 ITR 165] . It was also understood as such by CBDT which issued Circular No. 779 da…

Idea Cellular Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 3(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2285/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2022AY 2008-09
Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 40

…h Court, but restricted itself to a question of fact viz. whether the Tribunal had correctly found that the salary of the assessee was paid by a foreign company. This Court dismissed the appeal holding that it was a question of fact. (CIT v. SR Patton [(1998) 8 SCC 608] .) 15. Given this legislative history of Section 9(1)(ii), we can only assume that it was deliberately introduced with effect from 1-4-2000 and therefore intended to apply prospectively [See CIT v. Patel Bros. & Co. Ltd., (1995) 4 SCC 485, 494 (para 18) : (1995) 215 ITR 165]. It was also understood as such by CBDT which issued Circular No. 779 dat…

DCIT 3(2), Mumbai vs. Idea Cellular Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2273/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2022AY 2008-09
Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 40

…h Court, but restricted itself to a question of fact viz. whether the Tribunal had correctly found that the salary of the assessee was paid by a foreign company. This Court dismissed the appeal holding that it was a question of fact. (CIT v. SR Patton [(1998) 8 SCC 608] .) 15. Given this legislative history of Section 9(1)(ii), we can only assume that it was deliberately introduced with effect from 1-4-2000 and therefore intended to apply prospectively [See CIT v. Patel Bros. & Co. Ltd., (1995) 4 SCC 485, 494 (para 18) : (1995) 215 ITR 165]. It was also understood as such by CBDT which issued Circular No. 779 dat…

Wrinkle Vyapaar Pvt. Ltd, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 1(2), Kolkata

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 350/KOL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 284/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Wrinkle Vyapaar Pvt. Ltd. Cit(A), Nfac (Delhi) Vs 40, Strand Road Model House Ground Floor Room No. 102 Kolkata - 700001 Pan : Aaacw5921F अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kochar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Partha Pratim Barman, Addl. CIT
Section 14A

…Court, but restricted itself to a question of fact viz. whether the Tribunal had correctly found that the salary of the assessee was paid by a foreign company. This Court dismissed the appeal holding that it was a question of fact. (CIT v. S.R. Patton [(1998) 8 SCC 608] .) 15. Given this legislative history of Section 9(1)(ii), we can only assume that it was deliberately introduced with effect from 1-4- 2000 and therefore intended to apply prospectively [See CIT v. Patel Bros. & Co. Ltd., (1995) 4 SCC 485, 494 (para 18) : (1995) 215 ITR 165] . It was also understood as such by CBDT which issued Circular No. 779 d…

Wrinkle Vyapaar Pvt Ltd, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-1(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 284/KOL/2021[2015-116]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Sept 2022AY 2015-116

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 284/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Wrinkle Vyapaar Pvt. Ltd. Cit(A), Nfac (Delhi) Vs 40, Strand Road Model House Ground Floor Room No. 102 Kolkata - 700001 Pan : Aaacw5921F अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kochar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Partha Pratim Barman, Addl. CIT
Section 14A

…Court, but restricted itself to a question of fact viz. whether the Tribunal had correctly found that the salary of the assessee was paid by a foreign company. This Court dismissed the appeal holding that it was a question of fact. (CIT v. S.R. Patton [(1998) 8 SCC 608] .) 15. Given this legislative history of Section 9(1)(ii), we can only assume that it was deliberately introduced with effect from 1-4- 2000 and therefore intended to apply prospectively [See CIT v. Patel Bros. & Co. Ltd., (1995) 4 SCC 485, 494 (para 18) : (1995) 215 ITR 165] . It was also understood as such by CBDT which issued Circular No. 779 d…

Royal Orchid Hotels Ltd, Bengaluru vs. Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5(1)(1), Bengaluru

In the result, this ground is allowed

ITA 793/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri R.B Krishna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Ganesh, JCIT (DR)
Section 14ASection 194HSection 40

…h Court, but restricted itself to a question of fact viz. whether the Tribunal had correctly found that the salary of the assessee was paid by a foreign company. This Court dismissed the appeal holding that it was a question of fact. (CIT v. SR Patton [(1998) 8 SCC 608] .) 15. Given this legislative history of Section 9(1)(ii), we can only assume that it was deliberately introduced with effect from 1-4-2000 and therefore intended to apply prospectively [See CIT v. Patel Bros. & Co. Ltd., (1995) 4 SCC 485, 494 (para 18) : (1995) 215 ITR 165]. It was also understood as such by CBDT which issued Circular No. 779 dat…

M/S. Ukn Properties Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 1739/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri V S Chakrapani, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 56(2)(vii)

…h Court, but restricted itself to a question of fact viz. whether the Tribunal had correctly found that the salary of the assessee was paid by a foreign company. This Court dismissed the appeal holding that it was a question of fact. (CIT v. SR Patton [(1998) 8 SCC 608] .) 15. Given this legislative history of Section 9(1)(ii), we can only assume that it was deliberately introduced with effect from 1-4-2000 and therefore intended to apply prospectively [See CIT v. Patel Bros. & Co. Ltd., (1995) 4 SCC 485, 494 (para 18) : (1995) 215 ITR 165]. It was also understood as such by CBDT which issued Circular No. 779 da…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(1)(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Acropetal Technologies Private Limited, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 8/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Ms. Sunaina Bhatia, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri V S Chakrapani, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 40

…h Court, but restricted itself to a question of fact viz. whether the Tribunal had correctly found that the salary of the assessee was paid by a foreign company. This Court dismissed the appeal holding that it was a question of fact. (CIT v. SR Patton [(1998) 8 SCC 608] .) 15. Given this legislative history of Section 9(1)(ii), we can only assume that it was deliberately introduced with effect from 1-4- 2000 and therefore intended to apply prospectively [See CIT v. Patel Bros. & Co. Ltd., (1995) 4 SCC 485, 494 (para 18) : (1995) 215 ITR 165]. It was also understood as such by CBDT which issued Circular No. 779 da…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(1)(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Acropetal Technologies Private Limited, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 7/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Ms. Sunaina Bhatia, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri V S Chakrapani, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 40

…h Court, but restricted itself to a question of fact viz. whether the Tribunal had correctly found that the salary of the assessee was paid by a foreign company. This Court dismissed the appeal holding that it was a question of fact. (CIT v. SR Patton [(1998) 8 SCC 608] .) 15. Given this legislative history of Section 9(1)(ii), we can only assume that it was deliberately introduced with effect from 1-4- 2000 and therefore intended to apply prospectively [See CIT v. Patel Bros. & Co. Ltd., (1995) 4 SCC 485, 494 (para 18) : (1995) 215 ITR 165]. It was also understood as such by CBDT which issued Circular No. 779 da…

Toyota Tsusho India Private Limited, Ramanagara vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is allowed in favour of the assessee

ITA 175/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice Preseident & Shri Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri Darpan Kriplani, CAFor Respondent: Shri V S Chakrapani, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…h Court, but restricted itself to a question of fact viz. whether the Tribunal had correctly found that the salary of the assessee was paid by a foreign company. This Court dismissed the appeal holding that it was a question of fact. (CIT v. SR Patton [(1998) 8 SCC 608] .) 15. Given this legislative history of Section 9(1)(ii), we can only assume that it was deliberately introduced with effect from 1-4-2000 and therefore intended to apply prospectively [See CIT v. Patel Bros. & Co. Ltd., (1995) 4 SCC 485, 494 (para 18) : (1995) 215 ITR 165]. It was also understood as such by CBDT which issued Circular No. 779 da…

Babul Fiscal Services Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle-2(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 318/KOL/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Aug 2022AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

…Court, but restricted itself to a question of fact viz. whether the Tribunal had correctly found that the salary of the assessee was paid by a foreign company. This Court dismissed the appeal holding that it was a question of fact. (CIT v. S.R. Patton [(1998) 8 SCC 608] . 15. Given this legislative history of Section 9(1)(ii), we can only assume that it was deliberately introduced with effect from 1-4- 2000 and therefore intended to apply prospectively [See CIT v. Patel Bros. & Co. Ltd., (1995) 4 SCC 485, 494 (para 18) : (1995) 215 ITR 165] . It was also understood as such by CBDT which issued Circular No. 779 d…

Sedco Forex International Drill.Inc.&Ors vs. Commnr. of Income Tax, Dehrudun

The appeals are allowed

C.A. No.-000351-000355 - 2005Supreme Court17 Nov 2005
For Respondent: Commissioner of Income Tax, Dehradun & Anr
Section 9Section 9(1)Section 9(1)(ii)

…self to a question of fact viz., whether the Tribunal had correctly found that the salary of the assessee was paid by a foreign company. This Court dismissed the appeal holding it was a question of fact. [Commissioner of Income tax vs. S.R. Patton (1998) 8 SCC 608]. Given this legislative history of Section 9(1)(ii), we can only assume that it was deliberately introduced with effect from 1.4.2000 and therefore intended to apply prospectively . It was also understood as such by the CBDT which issued Circular No. 779 dated 14th September, 1999 containing explanatory notes on the provisions…