CIT v. Toshoku Ltd.

125 ITR 525Supreme Court of India1980#295 most cited

What is CIT v. Toshoku Ltd. authority for?

A non-resident commission agent is not chargeable to tax in India on commission income if no business operations are carried out in India. Consequently, no TDS is required under Section 195 on such payments.

270

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Toshoku Ltd. · Toshoku Ltd. · Section 9(1)(i) · Section 195 · Section 40(a)(i) · non-resident commission agent · sales commission taxable in India · business connection · TDS on non-residents · DTAA override · deemed to accrue or arise

Sections most often in play

Section 40(a)(i)Section 195Section 37(1)Section 143(3)Section 9(1)(i)Section 9(1)(vii)Section 115JBSection 1961

Issues it is cited on

section 5(2)(b)section 9(1)(i)section 195(1)section 195(2)section 5(2)business connectionsection 40(a)(i)permanent establishmentfees for included servicessection 195section 9(1)section 9(1)(vii)

Judgments citing CIT v. Toshoku Ltd.

ACIT Circle-28(1), Delhi vs. Sam Overseas, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 169/DEL/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jun 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannua N D Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

For Appellant: Sr. Advocate
Section 195

…iture incurred was since for technical services rendered outside India, is an income deemed to accrued and arise in India and was thus chargeable to tax. 52.3 The assessee-appellant had relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Toshoku, [125 ITR 525] wherein it had been held that commission amount earned by non-resident persons for the services rendered outside India cannot be deemed to be income which had either accrued or arose in India. The assessee had also relied upon the following judgments: (a) Corborandum & Co. Vs. CIT [108 ITR 335 (SC)] (b) Ind. Telesoft Pvt. Ltd. [267 ITR 725 (AAR…

Sam Overseas, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle- 24(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1695/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jun 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannua N D Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

For Appellant: Sr. Advocate
Section 195

…iture incurred was since for technical services rendered outside India, is an income deemed to accrued and arise in India and was thus chargeable to tax. 52.3 The assessee-appellant had relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Toshoku, [125 ITR 525] wherein it had been held that commission amount earned by non-resident persons for the services rendered outside India cannot be deemed to be income which had either accrued or arose in India. The assessee had also relied upon the following judgments: (a) Corborandum & Co. Vs. CIT [108 ITR 335 (SC)] (b) Ind. Telesoft Pvt. Ltd. [267 ITR 725 (AAR…

Income Tax Officer (It) 3 (2) (2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Macrotech Developers Ltd (As Sucessor of Lodha Developers Ltd Which Was Bellissimo Crown Buildmart Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and all the cross objection filed by the assesse are also dismissed

ITA 783/MUM/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Niraj ShethFor Respondent: Soumendu Kumar Dash
Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)

…re deductible under section 195 from export commission and other related charges payable to such a non-resident for services rendered outside India. 12. On the said aspect we may refer to the decision of the Supreme Court in C.I.T. vs. Toshoku Limited, (1980) 125 ITR 525 (SC). This case relates to the assessment year 1962-63. The Indian assessee had paid commission to two foreign companies through whom they had procured export orders Questions arose; what was the effect of the entries in the books of accounts of the Indian assessee which had resulted in debit and credit entries on account of commission and second…

Income Tax Officer (It) 3(2) (2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Macrotech Developers Ltd (As Sucessor of Lodha Developers Ltd Which Was Bellissimo Crown Buildmart Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and all the cross objection filed by the assesse are also dismissed

ITA 782/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Niraj ShethFor Respondent: Soumendu Kumar Dash
Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)

…re deductible under section 195 from export commission and other related charges payable to such a non-resident for services rendered outside India. 12. On the said aspect we may refer to the decision of the Supreme Court in C.I.T. vs. Toshoku Limited, (1980) 125 ITR 525 (SC). This case relates to the assessment year 1962-63. The Indian assessee had paid commission to two foreign companies through whom they had procured export orders Questions arose; what was the effect of the entries in the books of accounts of the Indian assessee which had resulted in debit and credit entries on account of commission and second…

Income Tax Officer (It) 3(2) (2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Macrotech Developers Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and all the cross objection filed by the assesse are also dismissed

ITA 500/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Niraj ShethFor Respondent: Soumendu Kumar Dash
Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)

…re deductible under section 195 from export commission and other related charges payable to such a non-resident for services rendered outside India. 12. On the said aspect we may refer to the decision of the Supreme Court in C.I.T. vs. Toshoku Limited, (1980) 125 ITR 525 (SC). This case relates to the assessment year 1962-63. The Indian assessee had paid commission to two foreign companies through whom they had procured export orders Questions arose; what was the effect of the entries in the books of accounts of the Indian assessee which had resulted in debit and credit entries on account of commission and second…

Income Tax Officer (It) 3(2) (2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Macrotech Develope\Rs Ltd (As Sucessor of Lodha Developers Ltd Which Was Sucessor of Bellissimo Crown Builders P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and all the cross objection filed by the assesse are also dismissed

ITA 498/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Niraj ShethFor Respondent: Soumendu Kumar Dash
Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)

…re deductible under section 195 from export commission and other related charges payable to such a non-resident for services rendered outside India. 12. On the said aspect we may refer to the decision of the Supreme Court in C.I.T. vs. Toshoku Limited, (1980) 125 ITR 525 (SC). This case relates to the assessment year 1962-63. The Indian assessee had paid commission to two foreign companies through whom they had procured export orders Questions arose; what was the effect of the entries in the books of accounts of the Indian assessee which had resulted in debit and credit entries on account of commission and second…

Income Tax Officer (It), Mumbai vs. M/S. Macrotech Developers Ltd (As Sucessor of Lodha Developers Ltd Which Was Bellissimo Crown Buildmart Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and all the cross objection filed by the assesse are also dismissed

ITA 497/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Niraj ShethFor Respondent: Soumendu Kumar Dash
Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)

…re deductible under section 195 from export commission and other related charges payable to such a non-resident for services rendered outside India. 12. On the said aspect we may refer to the decision of the Supreme Court in C.I.T. vs. Toshoku Limited, (1980) 125 ITR 525 (SC). This case relates to the assessment year 1962-63. The Indian assessee had paid commission to two foreign companies through whom they had procured export orders Questions arose; what was the effect of the entries in the books of accounts of the Indian assessee which had resulted in debit and credit entries on account of commission and second…

The ACIT, Kochi vs. M/S.Cochin Shipyard Ltd, Kochi

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

ITA 659/COCH/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S.

For Appellant: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr. ARFor Respondent: S/Shri Rajasekharan & K. Gopi, CAs
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32(1)(ii)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 40

…l services agreement with overseas entities who render the technical services to the assessee with regard to ship building and maintenance and taxes deducted on those payments. We notice that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Toshoku Ltd. [1980] 125 ITR 525 (SC) has considered a similar issue where it is held that the commission amounts earned by non-resident assessees for services rendered outside India cannot be deemed to be ITA Nos.655 to 659/Coch/2019 Page 7 of 10 income which have either accrued or arisen in India. A similar view is held by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Eon Techn…

The ACIT, Kochi vs. M/S.Cochin Shipyard Ltd, Kochi

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

ITA 658/COCH/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S.

For Appellant: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr. ARFor Respondent: S/Shri Rajasekharan & K. Gopi, CAs
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32(1)(ii)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 40

…l services agreement with overseas entities who render the technical services to the assessee with regard to ship building and maintenance and taxes deducted on those payments. We notice that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Toshoku Ltd. [1980] 125 ITR 525 (SC) has considered a similar issue where it is held that the commission amounts earned by non-resident assessees for services rendered outside India cannot be deemed to be ITA Nos.655 to 659/Coch/2019 Page 7 of 10 income which have either accrued or arisen in India. A similar view is held by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Eon Techn…

The ACIT, Kochi vs. M/S.Cochin Shipyard Ltd, Kochi

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

ITA 657/COCH/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S.

For Appellant: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr. ARFor Respondent: S/Shri Rajasekharan & K. Gopi, CAs
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32(1)(ii)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 40

…l services agreement with overseas entities who render the technical services to the assessee with regard to ship building and maintenance and taxes deducted on those payments. We notice that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Toshoku Ltd. [1980] 125 ITR 525 (SC) has considered a similar issue where it is held that the commission amounts earned by non-resident assessees for services rendered outside India cannot be deemed to be ITA Nos.655 to 659/Coch/2019 Page 7 of 10 income which have either accrued or arisen in India. A similar view is held by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Eon Techn…

The ACIT, Kochi vs. M/S.Cochin Shipyard Ltd, Kochi

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

ITA 656/COCH/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S.

For Appellant: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr. ARFor Respondent: S/Shri Rajasekharan & K. Gopi, CAs
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32(1)(ii)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 40

…l services agreement with overseas entities who render the technical services to the assessee with regard to ship building and maintenance and taxes deducted on those payments. We notice that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Toshoku Ltd. [1980] 125 ITR 525 (SC) has considered a similar issue where it is held that the commission amounts earned by non-resident assessees for services rendered outside India cannot be deemed to be ITA Nos.655 to 659/Coch/2019 Page 7 of 10 income which have either accrued or arisen in India. A similar view is held by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Eon Techn…

The ACIT, Kochi vs. M/S.Cochin Shipyard Ltd, Kochi

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

ITA 655/COCH/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S.

For Appellant: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr. ARFor Respondent: S/Shri Rajasekharan & K. Gopi, CAs
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32(1)(ii)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 40

…l services agreement with overseas entities who render the technical services to the assessee with regard to ship building and maintenance and taxes deducted on those payments. We notice that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Toshoku Ltd. [1980] 125 ITR 525 (SC) has considered a similar issue where it is held that the commission amounts earned by non-resident assessees for services rendered outside India cannot be deemed to be ITA Nos.655 to 659/Coch/2019 Page 7 of 10 income which have either accrued or arisen in India. A similar view is held by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Eon Techn…

ACIT, Central Circle-2(1), Hyderabad vs. Trident Chemphar Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 433/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Asst. Commissioner Of Income Vs. M/S. Trident Chemphar Ltd. Hyderabad. Tax, Central Circle – 2(1), Pan : Aaeft8416H. Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri B.G. Reddy Revenue By: Shri Rajendra Kumar – Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 09.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 09.01.2023

For Appellant: Shri B.G. ReddyFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar – CIT-DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 195Section 40

…wn by the Hon'ble AP High Court in the case of Sri Ram Refrigeration Industries Vs. ITO [361 ITR 119] (AP). Further, the Hon'ble the High Court also held that following the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs.Toshoku Ltd., [125 ITR 525] (SC) that making up of the entries in the books of account of assessee cannot be taken into be receipt actual or constructive by the non-resident sales agents. In view of that, prima-facie, the amounts paid from India does not establish that income has accrued or arisen in India as the services are not rendered in India at all and assessee has n…

DCIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Allsec Technologies Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 421/CHNY/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Dec 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT) –Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 195Section 195(1)Section 40

…ion of 5% for business obtained by these two entities outside India. Both the payees did not have any permanent establishment (PE) in India and therefore, the payments were not liable to TDS as per the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Toshuku Ltd. 125 ITR 525 and the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. EON Technology P. Ltd. 343 ITR 366. The assessee also relied on CBDT circular no. 23 dated 23.07.1969 which was in force in this year since the same was withdrawn only on 22.10.2009. 2.3 Concurring with assessee’s submissions Ld. CIT(A) held as under: - 13. The facts and circumstances of the…

Dy CIT (Int.Tax)-2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Credit Suisse (Singapore) Ltd., Mumbai

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

ITA 762/MUM/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Oct 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & S Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.762 & 761/Mum/2022 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 & 2017-18) Dy Cit(Int.Tax)-2(1)(1) M/S. Credit Suisse (Singapore) Ltd, Room No. 1713, 17Th बिधम/ 1. Raffles Link, 03/04-01, Floor, Air India Building, Vs. South Lobby, Singapore, Nariman Point, Mumbai- Foreign, Singapore 400 021. स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aaccc7328N (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Ms. Bharti Singh-Sr, Dr प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri. Paras Savla/Pratik Poddar/Harsh Shah, Ld. Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 28.07.2022 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 17.10.2022 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla: The Aforesaid Appeals Have Been Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Impugned Order Of Even Date 25.02.2022, Passed By Ld. Cit (A) Mumbai For The Quantum Of Assessment Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C For Ay 2016-17 & 2017-18. 2

For Appellant: Ms. Bharti Singh-Sr, DRFor Respondent: Shri. Paras Savla/Pratik
Section 143(3)

…dered within India. Thus, the offshore distribution 7 I.T.A. No. 761 & 762/Mum/2022 M/s Credit Suisse (Singapur) Ltd. income is not taxable in India. The learned Sr. Counsel by referring to the decision of Hon‟ble Supreme Court in CIT vs Toshoku Ltd., [1980] 125 ITR 525 (SC) submitted that the offshore distribution income earned by the assessee, in the present case, is similar in nature to agency commission income, which was held to be not chargeable to tax in India in the aforesaid decision since the non- resident taxpayer did not carry out any business operation in India and the income was earned for services…

Dy CIT-(Int-Taxation)-2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Credit Suisse (Singapore) Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 761/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Oct 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & S Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.762 & 761/Mum/2022 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 & 2017-18) Dy Cit(Int.Tax)-2(1)(1) M/S. Credit Suisse (Singapore) Ltd, Room No. 1713, 17Th बिधम/ 1. Raffles Link, 03/04-01, Floor, Air India Building, Vs. South Lobby, Singapore, Nariman Point, Mumbai- Foreign, Singapore 400 021. स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aaccc7328N (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Ms. Bharti Singh-Sr, Dr प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri. Paras Savla/Pratik Poddar/Harsh Shah, Ld. Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 28.07.2022 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 17.10.2022 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla: The Aforesaid Appeals Have Been Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Impugned Order Of Even Date 25.02.2022, Passed By Ld. Cit (A) Mumbai For The Quantum Of Assessment Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C For Ay 2016-17 & 2017-18. 2

For Appellant: Ms. Bharti Singh-Sr, DRFor Respondent: Shri. Paras Savla/Pratik
Section 143(3)

…dered within India. Thus, the offshore distribution 7 I.T.A. No. 761 & 762/Mum/2022 M/s Credit Suisse (Singapur) Ltd. income is not taxable in India. The learned Sr. Counsel by referring to the decision of Hon‟ble Supreme Court in CIT vs Toshoku Ltd., [1980] 125 ITR 525 (SC) submitted that the offshore distribution income earned by the assessee, in the present case, is similar in nature to agency commission income, which was held to be not chargeable to tax in India in the aforesaid decision since the non- resident taxpayer did not carry out any business operation in India and the income was earned for services…

Sulzer Pumps India Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT Circle-15 (3)(2), Mumbai

Accordingly, appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 7318/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm The Dy. Commissioner Of Sulzer Pumps India Pvt Ltd. Income Tax, Circle 15(3)(2), Plot No.9, Midc, Digha, Room No. 451, Aayakar Thane- Belapur Road, Navi Vs. Bhavan, Maharshi Karve Mumbai-400 708 Road, Mumbai-400 020 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Aaack2238F Assessee By : Shri V. Shridharan & Ms. Manasi C, Ar Revenue By : Shri C T Mathew, Dr Date Of Hearing: 17.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.09.2022

For Appellant: Shri V. Shridharan &For Respondent: Shri C T Mathew, DR
Section 143(3)Section 9(1)(vii)Section 92C

…or technical services under section 9(1)(vii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 1.2. The lower authorities erred on facts and in law, in not appreciating the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT V. Toshoku Ltd. Sulzes Pumps I Pvt. ltd.;AY 15-16 [1980] 125 ITR 525 (SC) and by the Bombay High Court in DIT v. Wizcraft International Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. [2004] 364 ITR 227 (Bom). 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the lower authorities erred in upholding the disallowance of Rs. 1,70,99,895/- relating to the commission expenditure incurred by the assessee on the export sales. 2.1. T…

DCIT, Chennai vs. M/S. United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue for the assessment years 2003-04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07, 2008-09,

ITA 1673/CHNY/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1673, 1688, 1689, 1691/Chny/2011 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2003-04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07 Assistant Commissioner Of Income M/S. United India Insurance Co. Tax, V. Ltd., Large Tax Payer Unit, 24, Whites Road, Chennai – Chennai. 600 014. [Pan: Aaacu-5552-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos: 1693/Chny/2011, 36/Chny/2014 & 696/Chny/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S. United India Insurance Co. Tax, V. Ltd., Large Tax Payer Unit, 24, Whites Road, Chennai – Chennai. 600 014. [Pan: Aaacu-5552-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri. S. Sundararaman, Ca Department Represented By : Shri. M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel & Ms. V. Pushpa, Jr. Standing Counsel सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 10.08.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.08.2022 आदेश /O R D E R

Section 195Section 195(1)Section 40Section 5(2)(b)

…been paid outside India to non-resident brokers or NRRI bank account. Further, payment to brokers in India would not tantamount to receipt in India, having regard to ratio of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Toshoku Ltd. Vs. CIT (1980) 125 ITR 525 (SC), where it was held that amounts credited in favour of non-resident were not at the disposal or control of statutory agent and therefore, cannot be charged to tax on the basis of receipt of income, actual or constructive in the taxable countries. Further, even assuming for a moment, payment to resident brokers is treated as received in India,…

DCIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue for the Assessment year

ITA 1666/CHNY/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1356/Chny/2013, 1626/Chny/2011 & 2310/Chny/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2005-06 & 2010-11 M/S. Royal Sundaram Alliance Assistant Commissioner Of Insurance Company Limited V. Income Tax, “Sundaram Towers” Large Tax Payer Unit, 45 & 46, Whites Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 002. [Pan: Aabcr-7106-G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1628, 1629 & 1630/Chny/2011 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09 M/S. Royal Sundaram Alliance Deputy Commissioner Of Insurance Company Limited V. Income Tax, “Sundaram Towers” Large Tax Payer Unit, 45 & 46, Whites Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 002. [Pan: Aabcr-7106-G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1666/Chny/2011 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2005-06 Assistant Commissioner Of Income M/S. Royal Sundaram Alliance Tax, V. Insurance Company Limited Large Tax Payer Unit, “Sundaram Towers” Chennai. 45 & 46, Whites Road, Chennai – 600 002. [Pan: Aabcr-7106-G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri. Sandeep Bagmar, Advocate

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 195Section 3Section 40Section 5

…been paid outside India to non-resident brokers or NRRI bank account. Further, payment to brokers in India would not tantamount to receipt in India, having regard to ratio of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Toshoku Ltd. Vs. CIT (1980) 125 ITR 525 (SC), where it was held that amounts credited in favour of non-resident were not at the disposal or control of statutory agent and therefore, cannot be charged to tax on the basis of receipt of income, actual or constructive in the taxable countries. Further, even assuming for a moment, payment to resident brokers is treated as received in India,…

M/S. Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue for the Assessment year

ITA 1630/CHNY/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1356/Chny/2013, 1626/Chny/2011 & 2310/Chny/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2005-06 & 2010-11 M/S. Royal Sundaram Alliance Assistant Commissioner Of Insurance Company Limited V. Income Tax, “Sundaram Towers” Large Tax Payer Unit, 45 & 46, Whites Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 002. [Pan: Aabcr-7106-G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1628, 1629 & 1630/Chny/2011 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09 M/S. Royal Sundaram Alliance Deputy Commissioner Of Insurance Company Limited V. Income Tax, “Sundaram Towers” Large Tax Payer Unit, 45 & 46, Whites Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 002. [Pan: Aabcr-7106-G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1666/Chny/2011 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2005-06 Assistant Commissioner Of Income M/S. Royal Sundaram Alliance Tax, V. Insurance Company Limited Large Tax Payer Unit, “Sundaram Towers” Chennai. 45 & 46, Whites Road, Chennai – 600 002. [Pan: Aabcr-7106-G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri. Sandeep Bagmar, Advocate

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 195Section 3Section 40Section 5

…been paid outside India to non-resident brokers or NRRI bank account. Further, payment to brokers in India would not tantamount to receipt in India, having regard to ratio of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Toshoku Ltd. Vs. CIT (1980) 125 ITR 525 (SC), where it was held that amounts credited in favour of non-resident were not at the disposal or control of statutory agent and therefore, cannot be charged to tax on the basis of receipt of income, actual or constructive in the taxable countries. Further, even assuming for a moment, payment to resident brokers is treated as received in India,…