What is CIT v. Visakhapatnam Port Trust authority for?

Sections 4 and 5 of the Income Tax Act, which define total income and chargeability, are subject to Section 90, meaning that Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements (DTAAs) override the Act's provisions in case of a conflict.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Visakhapatnam Port Trust?

124 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Visakhapatnam Port Trust (144 ITR 146), spanning 2011 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Visakhapatnam Port Trust come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 195, Section 9(1)(vi), Section 90(2), Section 143(3), Section 248, Section 254.

CIT v. Visakhapatnam Port Trust (144 ITR 146)

ITO (IT)- 1.2.2, MUMBAI vs. BENNETT COLEMAN & CO LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7523/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2020-21

For Respondent: Mr. Ajit Kumar Jain

Section 195Section 9(1)Section 9(1)(vi)Section 971

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “I” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2020-21 ITO (IT)-1.2.2 Bennett Coleman & Co Ltd., Room No. 621D, Kautilya The Times of India Building, D Vs. Bhawan, G-Block, BKC, N Road, Mumbai-400051. Mumbai-400 001. PAN NO. AAACB 4373 Q Appellant Respondent : Mr. Ajit Kumar Jain Assessee by Revenue by : Mr. Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 21/01/2026 Date of pronouncement : 30/01/2026 ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM This appeal by the Revenue is directed against order dated 2…

ITO IT 1.2.2, MUMBAI vs. BENNETT COLEMAN & CO LTD, MUMBAI

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

ITA 5256/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Ajit JainFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr.DR

Section 195Section 248Section 254Section 9(1)Section 9(1)(vi)

…effect. (a) Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ahmedabad Manufacturing and Calico Printing Co., (139 ITR 806 (Guj.)] at Pages 820-822. Bennett Coleman & Co. Ltd. (A.Ys. 2018-19 and 2019-20) 14 (b) Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Vishakhapatnam Port Trust [(1983) 144 ITR 146 (AP)] at pages 156-157. (c) N.V. Philips Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax [172 ITR 521) at pages 527 & 538-539.” 59. On a final note, India's change in position to the OECD Commentary cannot be a fact that influences the interpretation of the words defining royalty as they stand today. The only manner in which such change in position can be relevan…

ITO IT 1.2.2, MUMBAI vs. BENNETT COLEMAN & CO LTD, MUMBAI

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

ITA 5248/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Ajit JainFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr.DR

Section 195Section 248Section 254Section 9(1)Section 9(1)(vi)

…effect. (a) Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ahmedabad Manufacturing and Calico Printing Co., (139 ITR 806 (Guj.)] at Pages 820-822. Bennett Coleman & Co. Ltd. (A.Ys. 2018-19 and 2019-20) 14 (b) Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Vishakhapatnam Port Trust [(1983) 144 ITR 146 (AP)] at pages 156-157. (c) N.V. Philips Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax [172 ITR 521) at pages 527 & 538-539.” 59. On a final note, India's change in position to the OECD Commentary cannot be a fact that influences the interpretation of the words defining royalty as they stand today. The only manner in which such change in position can be relevan…

BUNDY INDIA LIMITED,,VADODARA vs. THE DY. CIT., CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA

In the result, Ground Number 6 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1403/AHD/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Oct 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1403/Ahd/2016 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2009-10 Bundy India Limited The Dy.Cit बनाम/ Plot No.2, Circle-1(1) V/S. Gidc Industrial Estate, Baroda Makarpura Vadodaria - 390 010 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaacb 3039 M (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate Revenue By : Shree Veerbadram Vislavath, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 31/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/10/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Siddhartha Nautiyal, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shree Veerbadram Vislavath, Sr.DR

Section 133(6)Section 250Section 92CSection 92C(1)Section 92C(3)

…al, and technical support provided by the parent Bundy India Ltd. vs. DCIT Asst. Year : 2009-10 company to all group entities. The assessee relied on judicial precedents such as Dresser-Rand India Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Mumbai) and CIT v. Vishakhapatnam Port Trust (144 ITR 146), on the ground that the commercial expediency of such expenditure could not be questioned by the tax authorities. However, the CIT(A) upheld the TPO’s findings, observing that a similar issue had arisen in the assessee’s own case for AY 2007–08, where the ALP was also held to be nil. The CIT(A) held that the assessee failed to demonstrate the ac…

INMARSAT SOLUTIONS BV,NETHERLANDS vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE INTL. TAX. 2(1)(1), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1729/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarinmarsat Solutions B. V., Vs. Acit, 14Th Floor, The Ruby, 29, International Taxation, Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar Circle-2(1)(1), Delhi (West), Mumbai (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aacci9974L Assessee By : Shri Hiten Thakkar, Adv Revenue By: Shri M. S. Nethrapal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 24/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 30/09/2025

For Appellant: Shri Hiten Thakkar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri M. S. Nethrapal, CIT DR

Section 142(2)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 9(1)

…High Courts also to the same effect. (a) Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ahmedabad Manufacturing and Calico Printing Co., [139 ITR 806 (Guj.)] at Pages 820-822. I.T.A. No. 1717/Del/2022 51 (b) Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Vishakhapatnam Port Trust [(1983) 144 ITR 146 (AP)] at pages 156-157. ITA 473/2012, 474/2012, 500/2012 & 244/2014 Page 48 (c) N.V Philips Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax [172 ITR 521] at pages 527 & 538-539." 59. On a final note, India's change in position to the OECD Commentary cannot be a fact that influences the interpretation of the words defining royalty as they stand today. The only ma…

HYATT INTERNATIONAL SOUTHWEST AISA LTD. vs. ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are dismissed

C.A. No.-009766-009766 - 2025Supreme Court24 Jul 2025

Bench: This Court, Before The High Court & Before The Income

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)

…2025 INSC 891 1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 9766 OF 2025 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 5710 of 2024) HYATT INTERNATIONAL SOUTHWEST ASIA LTD. ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX ...RESPONDENT(S) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO. 9767 OF 2025 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 20019 of 2025) (Arising out of SLP(C) Diary No. 14972 of 2024) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO. 9768 OF 2025 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 10152 of 2024) WITH CIVIL A…

ESSAR COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED,MAURITIUS vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1 (2)(2), NEW DELHI

ITA 340/DEL/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N. Venkatraman, ASG

Section 250Section 253Section 6(3)

…bject to the provisions of this Act”, which would include Section 90 of the Act. As to what would happen in the event of a conflict between the provision of the no longer res integra. 22. The Andhra Pradesh High Court in CITv. Visakhapatnam Port Trust [(1983) 144 ITR 146 (AP)] held that provisions of Sections 4 and 5 of the Income Tax Act are expressly made "subject to the provisions of the Act" which means that they are subject to the provisions of Section 90. By necessary implication, they are subject to the terms of the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement, if any, entered into by the Government of India. There…

SHENHZHEN SDG INFORMATION CO. LTD.,DELHI vs. CIRCLE INT. TAXATION 3(1)(2), DELHI

Appeal is allowed

ITA 746/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2017-18 Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Shenhzhen Sdg Information Co. Ltd., International Taxation-3, C/O- Tass Advisors Llp, 62, New Delhi Lower Ground Floor, Pocket 2, Jasola, New Delhi Pan: Aavcs7426C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Divyanshu Agrawal, Adv. Sh. Anubhav Rastogi, Adv. Department By Sh. Vijay B Vasanta, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 10.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 05.06.2025 Order

Section 263Section 44B

…tions where the business activities of non- resident satisfy "business in" criteria for establishing a taxable presence in the source country. A reference may be made to the decision of Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT Vs Visakhapatnam Port Trust (144 ITR 146). 8.3.1.4 Therefore, whether the income to be characterized as active business income or passive income is decided based on degree of involvement in the activities by the non-resident taxpayer in a source country. To categorize certain income stream as business income in the hands of non-resident in a source country, the taxpayer need to exhibit…