Commtdone, of Income Tax v. Tata

123 ITR 538High Court1980#7641 most cited

What is Commtdone, of Income Tax v. Tata authority for?

The Bombay High Court held that technical know-how granted under an agreement is not equivalent to the protected rights of a patent holder, and the limited right to use such know-how does not confer the same standing. The duration of the agreement and whether the assessee could use the know-how thereafter is immaterial.

14

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2019.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Tata Engineering and Locomotive Co Pvt Ltd · 123 ITR 538 · technical know-how · foreign collaborator · limited right to use · immateriality of post-agreement use

Issues it is cited on

trcenduring benefitrevenue expendituresection 37(1)section 37section 263section 26transferpersoncompanyindiabusiness

Judgments citing Commtdone, of Income Tax v. Tata

DCIT, C-5, Ludhiana vs. M/S Satyam Auto Components Ltd., Ludhiana

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are hereby

ITA 589/CHANDI/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shrisanjay Gargआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 1500/Chd/2017 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 The Dcit, Circle-5, Vs. M/S Satyam Auto Components Ludhiana Pvt Ltd., G.T.Road, Hero बनाम Nagar, Ludhiana

For Appellant: Sh. Manjit Singh, CIT DRFor Respondent: Sh. Subhash Aggarwal, Advocate
Section 36

…expenditure. On this preposition, the learned AR of the assessee company relied upon the following judicial pronouncements:- (a) Hindustan Aluminum Corporation Limited Vs. CIT 159 ITR 673 (Cal.) (b) CIT Vs. Tata Engineering & Locomotive Company (P) Limited 123 ITR 538 (Mumbai.) (c) M/s Sony India (P) Limited Vs. DCIT [ITAT Del] 315 ITR 150 (Delhi.) (d) CIT Vs. Indian Visit.com(P)Ltd (2009)176 Taxman 164 (Delhi) ITA Nos. 1500-c-17 & 589-C-2018 M/s Satyam Auto Components Pvt ltd., Ludhiana 5 (e) In view of the above stated facts, it has been requested that the expenditure may be allowed as revenue expenditure…

DCIT, C-5, Ludhiana vs. M/S Satyam Auto Components Ltd., Ludhiana

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are hereby

ITA 1500/CHANDI/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shrisanjay Gargआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 1500/Chd/2017 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 The Dcit, Circle-5, Vs. M/S Satyam Auto Components Ludhiana Pvt Ltd., G.T.Road, Hero बनाम Nagar, Ludhiana

For Appellant: Sh. Manjit Singh, CIT DRFor Respondent: Sh. Subhash Aggarwal, Advocate
Section 36

…expenditure. On this preposition, the learned AR of the assessee company relied upon the following judicial pronouncements:- (a) Hindustan Aluminum Corporation Limited Vs. CIT 159 ITR 673 (Cal.) (b) CIT Vs. Tata Engineering & Locomotive Company (P) Limited 123 ITR 538 (Mumbai.) (c) M/s Sony India (P) Limited Vs. DCIT [ITAT Del] 315 ITR 150 (Delhi.) (d) CIT Vs. Indian Visit.com(P)Ltd (2009)176 Taxman 164 (Delhi) ITA Nos. 1500-c-17 & 589-C-2018 M/s Satyam Auto Components Pvt ltd., Ludhiana 5 (e) In view of the above stated facts, it has been requested that the expenditure may be allowed as revenue expenditure…

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 467/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblei.T.A .No. 467/Del/2014 (A.Y 2009-10)

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 43Section 43B

…v. Bhai Sunder Dass & Sons (P) Ltd: 158 ITR 195 (Del.) CIT v. Hero Honda Motors Ltd.: 372 ITR 481 (Del.) • • Praga Tools Ltd. v. CIT : 123 ITR 773 (AP) Mysore Kirloskar Ltd. V. CIT: 114 ITR 443 (Kar.) • • CIT v. Tata Engineering & Locomotive Co. Pvt. Ltd. 123 ITR 538 (Bom) CIT v. Hindustan Motors Ltd.: 192 ITR 619 (Cal.) • • CIT v. Avery India Ltd.: 207 ITR 813 (Cal.) • Shivani Locks Ltd. (ITA No. 3173 & 3048/D/07) (Del)(ITAT) • Hero Honda (P) Ltd.: ITA No 5130/Del/2010 (Del. ITAT) The Ld. AR further submitted that there is no enduring benefit in capital field. The assessee only had the right to use the Tr…

M/S Hero Honda Motors Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2148/DEL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Feb 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Sh C.M.Garg & Shri Prashant Maharishihero Honda Motors Ltd, Dcit, 34, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, Circle-12(1), Vs. New Delhi New Delhi Pan:Aaacg0812J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. AK Saroha, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 263Section 32Section 37(1)Section 40Section 9

…diture The other High Courts in the country, loo. have taken a similar view in the under noted cases; Hero Honda Motors Ltd V DCIT 2148/del/2009 A Y 2004-05 Appeal Against Order u/s 263 of The ACT Page 13 of 34  CIT v. Tata Engg. & Locomotive Co. Pvl. Ltd. 123 ITR 538 (Bom,)  CIT v. Avery India Ltd. 207 ITR 813 (Cat)  Bajaj Tempo Ltd. v. C/T 207 ITR 1017 (Bom)  CIT v. Madras Rubber Factory ltd. 212 ITR 443 (Mad). The Delhi Bench of the Tribunal (TM) in the case of Goodyear India Ltd. vs. /TO : 73 ITD 189 (Del) (TM) observed as under: "In the present case, the assessee obtained right to use the technical kno…

CIT vs. Hero Honda Motors Ltd

ITA/625/2012HC Delhi03 Feb 2015

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

…assage oftime become obsolete Page 9 of 20 ,TA 694, 696, 698, 699/2011 8. 625, 633/2012 . +1 o riprkion of the Bombay High The said decision makes reference to the decisi ^ loe sdiu u ^ Engineermg & Court in Commtdone, of Income Tax v. Tata g r Pvi m (1980) 123 ITR 538 (Bom) where payment was Locomotive Co Pvt Ltd ^ made to the foreign collaborator m respec information reciuired for manufacture of automohve products. T lining adopted by Division Bench ofthe Bombay Hr^ Court was to the effect that teclmical lcnowhow made available under an agieemen not stand on the same footing as protected rights of aregistered…

CIT vs. Hero Honda Motors Ltd

ITA - 633 / 2012HC Delhi03 Feb 2015

…me obsolete Page 9 of 20 ,TA 694, 696, 698, 699/2011 8. 625, 633/2012 2015:DHC:11016-DB . +1 o riprkion of the Bombay High The said decision makes reference to the decisi ^ loe sdiu u ^ Engineermg & Court in Commtdone, of Income Tax v. Tata g r Pvi m (1980) 123 ITR 538 (Bom) where payment was Locomotive Co Pvt Ltd ^ made to the foreign collaborator m respec information reciuired for manufacture of automohve products. T lining adopted by Division Bench ofthe Bombay Hr^ Court was to the effect that teclmical lcnowhow made available under an agieemen not stand on the same footing as protected rights of aregistered…

Commissioner of Income Tax-IV vs. Hero Honda Motors Ltd

ITA - 699 / 2011HC Delhi03 Feb 2015

…me obsolete Page 9 of 20 ,TA 694, 696, 698, 699/2011 8. 625, 633/2012 2015:DHC:11016-DB . +1 o riprkion of the Bombay High The said decision makes reference to the decisi ^ loe sdiu u ^ Engineermg & Court in Commtdone, of Income Tax v. Tata g r Pvi m (1980) 123 ITR 538 (Bom) where payment was Locomotive Co Pvt Ltd ^ made to the foreign collaborator m respec information reciuired for manufacture of automohve products. T lining adopted by Division Bench ofthe Bombay Hr^ Court was to the effect that teclmical lcnowhow made available under an agieemen not stand on the same footing as protected rights of aregistered…

Commissioner of Income Tax-IV vs. Hero Honda Motors Ltd

ITA - 698 / 2011HC Delhi03 Feb 2015

…me obsolete Page 9 of 20 ,TA 694, 696, 698, 699/2011 8. 625, 633/2012 2015:DHC:11016-DB . +1 o riprkion of the Bombay High The said decision makes reference to the decisi ^ loe sdiu u ^ Engineermg & Court in Commtdone, of Income Tax v. Tata g r Pvi m (1980) 123 ITR 538 (Bom) where payment was Locomotive Co Pvt Ltd ^ made to the foreign collaborator m respec information reciuired for manufacture of automohve products. T lining adopted by Division Bench ofthe Bombay Hr^ Court was to the effect that teclmical lcnowhow made available under an agieemen not stand on the same footing as protected rights of aregistered…

Commissioner of Income Tax-IV vs. Hero Honda Motors Ltd

ITA - 696 / 2011HC Delhi03 Feb 2015

…me obsolete Page 9 of 20 ,TA 694, 696, 698, 699/2011 8. 625, 633/2012 2015:DHC:11016-DB . +1 o riprkion of the Bombay High The said decision makes reference to the decisi ^ loe sdiu u ^ Engineermg & Court in Commtdone, of Income Tax v. Tata g r Pvi m (1980) 123 ITR 538 (Bom) where payment was Locomotive Co Pvt Ltd ^ made to the foreign collaborator m respec information reciuired for manufacture of automohve products. T lining adopted by Division Bench ofthe Bombay Hr^ Court was to the effect that teclmical lcnowhow made available under an agieemen not stand on the same footing as protected rights of aregistered…

Commissioner of Income Tax-IV vs. Hero Honda Motors Limited

ITA/694/2011HC Delhi03 Feb 2015

…6, 698, 699/2011 & 625, 633/2012 Page 10 of 20 The said decision makes reference to the decision of the Bombay High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Tata Engineering & Locomotive Co Pvt Ltd (1980) 123 ITR 538 (Bom) where payment was made to the foreign collaborator in respect of design and technical information required for manufacture of automotive products. The reasoning adopted by Division Bench of the Bombay High Court was to the effect that technical knowhow made available under an agreement did not stand on the same footing as protected ri…

C.I.T vs. Denso India Ltd

ITA/16/2008HC Delhi08 Oct 2010

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REVA KHETRAPAL

…ITAs NO. 16 of 2008, 1011/2007,839/2010,840/2010,293/2010,107/2009 Page 1 of 19 Reportable * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI { ITA 16 of 2008,ITAs 1011/2007, 107/2009, 293/2010, 840/2010 & 839/2010} % Judgment Reserved on:14th September, 2010 Judgment Pronounced on : 08th October, 2010 (1) ITA 16 OF 2008 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX . . . APPELLANT THROUGH: Ms.Prem Lata Bansal, Advocate VERSUS DENSO INDIA PVT. LTD . . .RESPONDENT THROUGH: Mr. M.S. Syali, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Satyen Sethi, Ms.…

The Commissioner of Income Tax-II vs. Munjal Showa Ltd

Accordingly, they are dismissed without any order as to

ITA/85/2009HC Delhi06 Sept 2010
Section 143(3)

…* HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on : 16th July, 2010 % Judgment Pronounced on: 6th September, 2010 + ITA 56/2009 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Adv. versus MUNJAL SHOWA LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Kavita Jha, Adv. AND ITA 85/2009 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Adv. versus MUNJAL SHOWA LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Kavita Jha, Adv.…

The Commissioner of Income Tax-II vs. Munjal Showa Ltd

Accordingly, they are dismissed without any order as to

ITA/86/2009HC Delhi06 Sept 2010
Section 143(3)

…* HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on : 16th July, 2010 % Judgment Pronounced on: 6th September, 2010 + ITA 56/2009 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Adv. versus MUNJAL SHOWA LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Kavita Jha, Adv. AND ITA 85/2009 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Adv. versus MUNJAL SHOWA LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Kavita Jha, Adv.…

Commissioner of Income Tax-IV vs. M/s DCM Technologies Limited

ITA/861/2010HC Delhi15 Jul 2010
Section 260A

…ITR 692 (SC); CIT v. Lucas T.V.S. Limited (No.1) (1977) 110 ITR 338 (Mad); CIT v. Sarada Binding Works (1976) 102 ITR 187 (Mad.); Agarwal Hardware Works (P.) Ltd. v. CIT (1980) 121 ITR 510 (Cal); CIT v. Tata Engineering and Locomotive Co. Pvt. Ltd. (1980) 123 ITR 538 (Bom.); Empire Jute Co. Ltd. v. CIT (1980) 124 ITR 1 (SC) and Alembic Chemical Works Co. Ltd.(supra) and eventually came to hold thus: “It would thus appear that the courts have applied different tests like starting of a new business on the basis of technical know-how received from the foreign firm, the exclusive right of the company to use…

Commtdone, of Income Tax v. Tata (123 ITR 538) — Cited in 14 Judgments | BharatTax