Columbia Sportswear Company v. DIT, Bangalore

346 ITR 161Supreme Court of India2012#9704 most cited

What is Columbia Sportswear Company v. DIT, Bangalore authority for?

Decisions of the Authority for Advance Rulings (AAR) can have persuasive value for other parties, even if the tax treaties involved differ, provided there's no material fact making the definition of 'FTS' unworkable.

11

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Columbia Sportswear Company v DIT · 346 ITR 161 SC · persuasive value · Authority for Advance Rulings · AAR · tax treaties · FTS · definition of FTS

Judgments citing Columbia Sportswear Company v. DIT, Bangalore

Solvay S A, Mumbai vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax International Tax Circle 4(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2071/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Oct 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya

For Respondent: Shri Vijay Mehta
Section 143(3)Section 9(1)(vii)

…as well and accordingly, may be relied upon by the authority itself or by the applicant/department. We find that our aforesaid view is fortified by the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Columbia Sportswear Company Vs. DIT, Bangalore (2012) 346 ITR 161 (SC). We are further of the considered view, that though the lower authorities had declined to take cognizance of the observations of the Hon'ble AAR on the ground that the „tax treaties" involved in the said case were different as against that involved in the present case, however, there is no mention of any such material fact which could persua…

Springer Nature Customer Services Centre Gmbh, New Delhi vs. JCIT, Internationalo Taxation, Circle-3(1)(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 2534/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Oct 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2013-14] Springer Nature Customer Services Vs Jcit Centre Gmbh (Earlier Known As (International Taxation), Springer Customer Centre Gmbh), Circle-3(1)(2), 7Th Floor, Vijaya Building, New Delhi. 17-Barakhamba Road, New Delhi-110001. Pan-Aascs1092B Appellant Respondent Appellant By S/Shri Himanshu Sinha, Bhuwan Dhooper & Vibhu Gupta, Advocates Respondent By Ms. Rashmita Jha, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 20.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 14.10.2022

Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 234BSection 271Section 9(1)(vi)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “D” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER [Assessment Year : 2013-14] Springer Nature Customer Services vs JCIT Centre GmbH (earlier known as (International Taxation), Springer Customer Centre GmbH), Circle-3(1)(2), 7th Floor, Vijaya Building, New Delhi. 17-Barakhamba Road, New Delhi-110001. PAN-AASCS1092B APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by S/Shri Himanshu Sinha, Bhuwan Dhooper & Vibhu Gupta, Advocates Respondent by Ms. Rashmita Jha, CIT DR Date of Hearing 20.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement 14.10.2022 ORDER PER KUL…

Springer Verlag Gmbh, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 3(1)(2), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are disposed of as

ITA 434/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri N.K. Choudhry

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 9(1)(vi)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘D’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND SHRI N.K. CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 434/DEL/2019 [A.Y 2014-15] ITA No. 3826/DEL/2019 [A.Y 2015-16] M/s Springer Verlag GmbH Vs. The D.C.I.T C/o Springer Nature India Pvt. Ltd International Taxation 7th Floor, Vijaya Building Circle -3(1)(2), 17, Barakhamba Road New Delhi New Delhi PAN: AAOCS 4799 R (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Himanshu Sinha, Adv Shri Bhuvan Dhoopar, Adv Shri Vibhu Gupta, Adv Department By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 14.07.2022 Da…

Springer Verlag Gmbh, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 3(1)(2), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are disposed of as

ITA 3826/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri N.K. Choudhry

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 9(1)(vi)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘D’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND SHRI N.K. CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 434/DEL/2019 [A.Y 2014-15] ITA No. 3826/DEL/2019 [A.Y 2015-16] M/s Springer Verlag GmbH Vs. The D.C.I.T C/o Springer Nature India Pvt. Ltd International Taxation 7th Floor, Vijaya Building Circle -3(1)(2), 17, Barakhamba Road New Delhi New Delhi PAN: AAOCS 4799 R (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Himanshu Sinha, Adv Shri Bhuvan Dhoopar, Adv Shri Vibhu Gupta, Adv Department By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 14.07.2022 Da…

Pomegranate Media (Pty) Ltd (Formerly Known As Endemol South Africa (Proprietary) Ltd), Bryanston Gauteng vs. Asst CIT (It)-3(3)(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6658/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar () & Shri Ravish Sood () Ita Nos.6658 & 6659/Mum/2019 (Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2016-17) Pomegranate Media (Pty) Ltd. Assistant Commissioner Of [Formerly Known As Endemol South Africa Vs. Income Tax, International (Proprietary) Ltd.] Taxation – 3(3)(2), 272 Kent Avenue, Randburg, Air India Building, Nariman Gauteng, 2194, Po Box, 71917, Point, Mumbai 400 021 Bryanston, Gauteng 2012

For Appellant: Shri Siddesh Chaugule, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Subramaniyam, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 195

…as well and accordingly, may be relied upon by the authority itself or by the applicant/department. We find that our aforesaid view is fortified by the judgment of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Columbia Sportswear Company Vs. DIT, Bangalore (2012) 346 ITR 161 (SC). We are further of the considered view, that though the lower authorities had declined to take cognizance of the observations of the ITA Nos. 6658 &6659/Mum/2019 A.Ys. 2011-12 & 2016-17 8 Pomegranate Media (Pty) Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, IT-3(3)(2) Hon‟ble AAR on the ground that the „tax treaties‟ involved in the said c…

Pomegranate Media (Pty) Ltd, South Africa vs. DCIT(It)-3(3)(2), Mumbai

ITA 698/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Saktijit Dey

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek TilakFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Singh
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 9

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I”BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA no.698/Mum./2019 (Assessment Year : 2014–15) ITA no.808/Mum./2019 (Assessment Year : 2015–16) Pomegranate Media (Pty) Ltd. [Formerly known as Endemol South Africa (Proprietary) Ltd.], 272 Kent Avenue, Randburg, Gauteng ……………. Appellant 2194, P.O. Box 71917 Bryanston, Gauteng 2012 PAN – AACCE7009G v/s Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax International Transaction–3(3)(2) Mumbai (Earlier the jurisdiction was ……………. Respondent with Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax International Transact…

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)

…alty’ and not is the question. He further stressed that the AAR was binding only on the entity in the case of which decision was given and not on others. He in this regard, placed reliance on Hon'ble Supreme Court in Columbia Sportswear Company Vs. DIT (2012) 346 ITR 161 (SC) and the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Prudential Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. DIT (International Taxation) & Anr. (2010) 324 ITR 381 (Bom). He further pointed out that there is no question of royalty on IT support services being provided as it did not make available any technology. He further pointed out that the first thing to be decided is wh…

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)

…alty’ and not is the question. He further stressed that the AAR was binding only on the entity in the case of which decision was given and not on others. He in this regard, placed reliance on Hon'ble Supreme Court in Columbia Sportswear Company Vs. DIT (2012) 346 ITR 161 (SC) and the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Prudential Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. DIT (International Taxation) & Anr. (2010) 324 ITR 381 (Bom). He further pointed out that there is no question of royalty on IT support services being provided as it did not make available any technology. He further pointed out that the first thing to be decided is wh…

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)

…alty’ and not is the question. He further stressed that the AAR was binding only on the entity in the case of which decision was given and not on others. He in this regard, placed reliance on Hon'ble Supreme Court in Columbia Sportswear Company Vs. DIT (2012) 346 ITR 161 (SC) and the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Prudential Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. DIT (International Taxation) & Anr. (2010) 324 ITR 381 (Bom). He further pointed out that there is no question of royalty on IT support services being provided as it did not make available any technology. He further pointed out that the first thing to be decided is wh…

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

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 905/PUN/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jan 2019AY 2007-08

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)

…alty’ and not is the question. He further stressed that the AAR was binding only on the entity in the case of which decision was given and not on others. He in this regard, placed reliance on Hon'ble Supreme Court in Columbia Sportswear Company Vs. DIT (2012) 346 ITR 161 (SC) and the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Prudential Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. DIT (International Taxation) & Anr. (2010) 324 ITR 381 (Bom). He further pointed out that there is no question of royalty on IT support services being provided as it did not make available any technology. He further pointed out that the first thing to be decided is wh…

Endemol South Africa (Properietary) Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) Cir 2(2)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1732/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Ravish Soodm/S Endemol South Africa Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax- (Proprietary) Ltd., C/O (International Taxation), Circle 2(2)(1), Endemol India Private Limited Room No. 132, Scindia House, 501, 1601, Lotus Grandeur, Vs. Ballard Estate, Off Veera Desai Road, Mumbai- 400038 Andheri (W), Mumbai- 400053. Pan – Aacce7009G (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Rekha Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri M.V. Rajguru, Sr.D.R
Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 9

…as well and accordingly, may be relied upon by the authority itself or by the applicant/department. We find that our aforesaid view is fortified by the judgment of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Columbia Sportswear Company Vs. DIT, Bangalore (2012) 346 ITR 161 (SC). We are further of the considered view, that though the lower authorities had declined to take cognizance of the observations of the Hon‟ble AAR on the ground that the „tax treaties‟ involved in the said case were different as against that involved in the present case, however, there is no mention of any such material fact which could persua…