How many judgments cite CIT v. Toshoku Ltd.?

270 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Toshoku Ltd. (125 ITR 525), spanning 2007 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Toshoku Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 40(a)(i), Section 195, Section 37(1), Section 143(3), Section 9(1)(i), Section 9(1)(vii).

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 366,314 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 195 Section 37(1)Section 143(3)Section 9(1)(i)Section 9(1)(vii)Section 115JB Section 1961

Issues it is cited on

section 5(2)(b)section 9(1)(i)section 195(1)section 195(2)section 5(2)business connection section 40(a)(i)permanent establishment fees for included services section 195 section 9(1)section 9(1)(vii)

Judgments citing CIT v. Toshoku Ltd.

M/S. Rajinder Kumar Aggarwal (HUF), New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2996/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Oct 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri O.P. Kant[Through Video Conferencing] Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40Section 9

…in India, therefore, no income is chargeable to tax in India. Accordingly, the assessee was not required to deduct tax at source under section 195 of the Act. The assessee relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs Toshoku Ltd., 125 ITR 525 (SC) where on identical facts it has been held that amount of commission earned by non-resident foreign payee for rendering services outside India could not be deemed to be income arising in India. The Assessing Officer rejected the contention of the assessee and held that as per the provisions of Explanation to section 9 for the purpose of claus…

The Dy.CIT., Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Inductotherm (India) Private Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 975/AHD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Purshottam Kumar, Sr. D.R

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40

…Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law on facts in deleting the disallowance u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the IT. Act on export commission payments made to the Nonresident Agents solely relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Toshuku Ltd. (1980) 125 ITR 525 (SC) which stands superseded by the subsequent amendments brought in IT. Act.” 3. The fact in brief is that return declaring income of Rs. 1,17,78,34,550/- was filed on 28th Nov, 2012. The case was subject to scrutiny assessment and notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act was issued on 23rd Sep, 2013. The further facts of the case are discussed while adju…

M/S. Prime Oceanic Pvt. Ltd. Gandhi Nagar, Upla Sonava, Scheme No.8, Alwar vs. ITO Ward-2(3), Alwar

In the result, the disallowance so made is directed to be deleted and the ground of appeal is allowed

ITA 652/JPR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Jun 2021AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt Monisha Choudhary (JCIT)

Section 195Section 40

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 652/JP/2019 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2013-14 cuke M/s Prime Oceanic Pvt. Ltd., The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Gandhi Nagar, Upla Sonava, Ward-2(3), Scheme No. 8, Alwar (Raj.) Alwar (Raj) LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAFCP0730Q vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Manish Agarwal (CA) jktLo…

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

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3412/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 May 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed) [Through Virtual Court]

For Appellant: Shri Rajdeep Singh, Sr. D.RFor Respondent: Shri M. S. Chhajed, A.R

Section 195Section 40Section 9(1)(i)

…ed that assesse Company has made payment to number of overseas vendors as Commission to the tune of Rs. 3,94,14,339/- of the Act. 4. And in support of its contention, assesse cited a judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of CIT vs. Toshoku Limited (125 ITR 525) wherein it is held that the commission agent who does not carry out any business operation in India and acts as a selling agent outside India is not chargeable t tax in India and that the receipt in India of the sale proceeds remitted by the purchasers from abroad did not amount to an operation carried out by the non-resident commission agent in…

Sqs India Bfsi Ltd. (Formerly Known As M/S. Thinksoft Global Services Ltd.), Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 6(2), Chennai

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

ITA 224/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 May 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 223 & 224/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2012-13 & 2013-14 M/S. Sqs India Bfsi Ltd. (Formerly The Deputy Commissioner Of Known As M/S. Thinksoft Global Vs. Income Tax, Services Ltd.) Door No. 6A, 6Th Floor, Corporate Circle 6(2), Prince Infocity Ii, 283/3 & 283/4, Rajiv Chennai. Gandhi Salai (Omr), Kandanchavadi, Chennai 600 036. [Pan:Aabct0976G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri G. Johnson, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 25.03.2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 03.05.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: Both The Appeals Filed By The Same Assessee Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 15, Chennai, Dated 31.10.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2012-13 & 2013-14. Besides Challenging Confirmation Of Disallowance Of Export Commission Payment In The Assessment Year 2012-13, The Assessee Also Challenged Confirmation Of Disallowance Towards Payments For Professional Services Rendered For Both The Assessment Years 2012-13 & 2013-14. 2

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson, Addl. CIT

Section 195Section 40Section 9(1)

…both the overseas agents are not having any permanent establishment (PE) in India and are residents of the respective foreign countries. Relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Toshoku Ltd. 4 I.T.A. Nos. 223 & 224/Chny/19 125 ITR 525, wherein, it was opined that payment of commission to non- resident agents would not be taxable in India, the assessee has pleaded that the TDS would not be applicable on sales commission paid to non-resident agents. The Assessing Officer did not heed to the above contention of the assessee and proceeded to invoke the provisions of section 40(a)(…

Sqs India Bfsi Ltd. (Formerly Known As M/S. Thinksoft Global Services Ltd.), Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 6(2), Chennai

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

ITA 223/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 May 2021AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson, Addl. CIT

Section 195Section 40Section 9(1)

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Surat vs. M/S. J.K. Paper Ltd., Surat

In the result this ground of appeal is dismissed

ITA 365/SRT/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble(Virtual Hearing) आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.365/Srt/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S J. K. Paper Ltd., Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), P.O. Central Pulp Mills, Surat. Fort Songadh – 394660. Dist. Tapi, Gujarat. [Pan: Aaact 6305 N] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""थ"/Respondent

Section 115JSection 14ASection 41(1)

…he addition made on account of Non deduction of tax on foreign remittance of Rs.42,36,591/-.The Ld. Sr. Counsel for the assessee submits that ld.CIT(A) while granting relief to the assessee followed the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT Vs Toshoku Ltd (125 ITR 525 SC) and further Tribunal in assessee’s own case for A.Y. 2010-11 to 2012-13 in order dated 04.11.2020 allowed similar relief to the assessee by dismissing the identical ground of appeal. The ld. Counsel accordingly submits that the issue is also squarely covered in favour of assessee. 36. On the other hand, the ld.CIT-DR for the Revenue submits t…

The DCIT, Circle-4, Ahmedabad vs. Ghcl Limited, Ahmedabad

ITA 976/AHD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Mar 2021AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Mohd. Usman, CIR-D.R. &

Section 143(2)Section 144C(2)(b)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 37(1)Section 92C

…T 254], which hold that such kind of commission is not taxable in India and accordingly no liability to deduct tax was there. Further the decision of honourable Supreme Court of India in the case of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Toshoku Limited 125 ITR 525, still prevails as on date and is the law of the land as regards applicability of TDS provisions to commission paid to overseas/non-resident agents by Indian Exporters. 4.17. Further, reliance is placed on the following decisions / judgments:- Recently the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of C1T, Chennai Vs. Farida Leather Company in Tax App…

Ghcl Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT., Circle-4, Ahmedabad

ITA 1042/AHD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Mar 2021AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Mohd. Usman, CIR-D.R. &

Section 143(2)Section 144C(2)(b)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 37(1)Section 92C

DCIT 8(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Shamrock Pharmachemi P. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, both appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 862/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Nov 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M.Balaganeshita Nos. 862 & 863/Mum/2018 (Assessment Years :2013-14 & 2014-15) Dcit-8(2)(1) Vs. M/S. Shamrock Pharmachemi Room No.624, Pvt.Ltd. Aaykar Bhawan, M.K.Road Off Dr. E Moses Road Mumbai-400 020 Worli, Mumbai-400 025 Pan/Gir No.Aaacs6290H (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Bharat Gandhi, Ar Revenue By Shri V.Vinod Kumar, Sr.Ar Date Of Hearing 28/10/2020 Date Of Pronouncement 11/11/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per M. Balaganesh (A.M): These Two Appeals Filed By Revenue In Ita Nos. 862 & 863/Mum/2018 For Assessment Years (Ay) 2013-14 & 2014-15 Arise Out Of The Order By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 14, Mumbai In Appeals No.Cit(A)-14/It-170/15-16 & Cit(A)-14/It- 119/16-17, Dated 27/11/2017 (Ld. Cit(A) In Short) Against The Order Of Assessment Passed U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As Act) Dated 31/08/2016 By The Ld. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-8(2)(1), Mumbai (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. Ao).

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195(2)Section 40

…of GE India Technology Center Pvt.Ltd. vs CIT M/s. Shamrock Pharmachemi Pvt.Ltd. reported in 327 ITR 456(SC) in support of his contentions apart from the following decisions:- (a) Decision of Hon‘ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Toshoku Ltd reported in 125 ITR 525 (b) (b) decision of Hon‘ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Gujarat reclaim and rubber products pvt Ltd. Reported in 383 ITR 236 (Bom) (c) Decision of Hon‘ble le Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Angelique international limited reported in 359 ITR 9 (delhi) (d) Decision of Hon‘ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT vs Modern In…

M/S. Device Driven (India) Pvt. Ltd vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax

ITA/257/2014HC Kerala13 Oct 2020

Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI

Section 10ASection 10BSection 143(1)Section 195Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

…“C.R” IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.R.RAVI TUESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2020 / 21ST ASWINA, 1942 I.T.A.No.257 OF 2014 * [(AGAINST THE ORDER IN ITA.NO.282/2013 DATED 29.11.2013 OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, COCHIN BENCH, KOCHI RECEIVED BY THE APPELLANT ON 10.12.2013). * APPELLANT/ RESPONDENT IN ITA: M/S. DEVICE DRIVEN (INDIA) PVT. LTD., GROUND FLOOR, PADMANABHAM, TECHNOPARK, KARIYAVATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REP BY ITS DIRECTOR, MS.INDU LAKSHMY LAL * RESPONDENT/ APPELLANT IN ITA: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX…

ACIT -25(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Gepach International, Mumbai

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

ITA 5943/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Sept 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Shris. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 5943 & 5942/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14 & 2014-15)

For Appellant: Ms. Samatha, DR byFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Mehta, AR

Section 143(2)Section 195Section 40Section 9

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & SHRIS. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 5943 & 5942/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14 & 2014-15) M/s Gepach International, ACIT – 25(2), B/13, Chand Society, Juhu Room no. 508, C-10, 5th बिधम/ Church Road, floor, Pratyakshkar Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai-400 049 Bandra Kurla Complex(E), Mumbai-400 051 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN No. AAAFG5438N (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant : Ms. Samatha, DR by प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondentby : Shri Vijay Mehta, AR 07.08.2020 Virtual Date of Hea…

Knight Frank (India) P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 2(2), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5050/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm

Section 143(3)Section 40Section 5(2)Section 7Section 80CSection 9(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM ITA No. 5050 & 5051/Mum/2015 (Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 2011-12) M/s Knight Frank (India) Pvt. Vs. D.C.I.T.-2(2), Room No. 548, 5th Floor, Ltd., C/o- Kalyaniwalla & Mistry, aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Army & Navy Building, 3r Marg, Mumbai. Floor, 148, M.G. Road, Fort, Mumbai-400001. PAN/GIR No.AAACK 1544 J (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri M.M Golvala & Shri Amey Wagle (ARs) Revenue by Shri R. Bhoopathy (DR) Date of Hearing 20/12/2019 Date of Pronouncement 23/12/2019 आदेश / O R D E R PER: R.C. SHARMA, A…

Classic Linen International Pvt Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 1(2), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee in iTA

ITA 2406/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Dec 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Ramit Kochar"नधा$रण वष$ /Assessment Year: 2011-12

For Respondent: 16.09.2019

Section 100Section 10ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40

…or place of business or business connection in India; or (ii) any other presence in any manner whatsoever in India Therefore, the judgments relied on by the assessee in the case of CIT vs. R.D. Agarwal & Co, 56 ITR 20 (1965) (SC), CIT v. Toshoku Ltd. (21980) 125 ITR 525 (SC), TVS Motor Co. Ltd. v ACIT (ITA NO. 697 & 7S7/ Mds/2009, DCIT v. Dibi's Laboratories Ltd and CIT v. EON Technology Pvt Ltd. will not come in as rescue to the assessee. In view of the discussion as above the payment of commission made to foreign agents being sum of Rs.34,98,309 is disallowed under section 40 a (ia). 9. Aggrieved by an asses…

Thy ACIT, Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. M & B Engineering Limited, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 370/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Oct 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad

For Appellant: Shri Lalit P. Jain, Sr. D.R

Section 195Section 195(2)Section 40Section 5Section 5(2)(b)Section 9Section 9(1)(i)Section 9(1)(vii)

…Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law on facts in deleting the disallowance u/s. 40(a)(i) of the IT. Act on export commission payments made to the Non-resident Agents solely relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Toshuku Ltd. (1980) 125 ITR 525 (SC) which is no more applicable in view of the subsequent amendments brought in the IT. Act. 1.2 The Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that such payments are chargeable to tax in India under the provisions of Section 9(1)(vii) of the IT. Act and, therefore, the assessee was required to deduct TDS on such remittances.” 3. When the matter was c…

M/S Jlc Electromet Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. Assistanat Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4, Jaipur

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1494/JPR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Sept 2019AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya &For Respondent: Shri Jai Singh (JCIT)

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 234BSection 40

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCH ‘B’ JAIPUR Jh fot; iky jko] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 1494/JP/2018 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2013-14 cuke M/s JLC Electromet Pvt. Ltd. ACIT, Vs. E-153-A, Road No. 11-H, V.K.I, Circle-4, Area, Jaipur Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AABCJ8786A vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 23/JP/2019 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2014-15 cuke M/s JLC Electromet Pvt.…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Ishman International, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5880/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Sh. Prashant Maharishiassessment Year : 2010-11

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 195Section 40Section 9

…e qua non and inevitable. It also appears that in the aforesaid ruling, the earlier ruling of the Hon'ble AAR in the case of Spahi Projects, 315 ITR 374 has not been considered and also the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Toshuku, 125 ITR 525 has also been not considered, and therefore the case of SKF Boilers and Driers P. Ltd. is to be treated as per incuriam. Therefore, the finding of the AO that right to receive commission arises in India when the order is executed by the person resident in India is not correct since the mere fact that payment is made by a person resident in India…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Minda Corporation Ltd., Delhi

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 5053/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Sainidr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 5053/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Deputy Commissioner Of Vs M/S Minda Corporation Ltd., Income Tax, Central Circle-03, 36A, Rajasthan Udog Nagar, New Delhi-110055 Delhi-110033 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacm0344C Assessee By : Sh. Somil Aggarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Rinku Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.07.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.07.2019 Order Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar:

For Appellant: Sh. Somil Aggarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Rinku Singh, Sr. DR

Section 14ASection 40Section 9(1)

…s chargeable to tax in India in the hands of the non-resident recipients, then only the tax would be required to be deducted at source for such pay ments. Placing reliance on the deci sion of the Hon’ble Apex court in the case of Ld. CIT(A) vs. Toshok u Ltd., 125 ITR 525 and of the Hon’ble juri sdicti onal High Court i n the cases of Ld. CIT(A) v s. Eon Technology priv ate li mited 343 IT R 366 (del), DIT vs. Panal fa Autolectrik Ltd 227 taxman 371 (Del) and CIT vs. Angelique international Ltd., 359 IT R 9 (Del) and Arti cle 12(5)(b) of the DTAA between I ndia and Netherl ands, he submitted that the commission pa…

Tecnotree Convergence Lt D, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12 is dismissed

ITA 1520/BANG/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boaz

For Respondent: Shri. Pradeep Kumar, CIT

Section 10ASection 10A(3)Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 155Section 40Section 94(7)

…, the question that needs to be addressed is whether the income earned by the foreign commission agents accrues or arises from any business connection in India. In this regard, the Hon’ble Apex Court in its decision in the case of CIT Vs. Toshoku Ltd., (1980) 125 ITR 525 (SC) held that the commission amounts which were earned by non-residents for the services rendered outside India cannot be deemed to be incomes that have either accrued or arisen in India. 10.5.8 The Explanations introduced to explain and expand the scope of “business connection” in Section 9(1) of the Act are as under:- “[Explanation 2.—For th…

Tecnotree Convergence Lt D, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12 is dismissed

ITA 1519/BANG/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boaz

For Respondent: Shri. Pradeep Kumar, CIT

Section 10ASection 10A(3)Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 155Section 40Section 94(7)