Convergys Customer Management Group Inc. v. ADIT

58 SOT 69Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2013#11719 most cited
9

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,615 Indian tax judgments — from 2021 to 2023.

Judgments citing Convergys Customer Management Group Inc. v. ADIT

Aptean India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 422/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No. 422/Bang/2022 Assessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Aptean India Pvt. Ltd., 1/2, 8Th Floor, Level 5, The Assistant Golden Heights, Commissioner Of 59Th C Cross Road, Income Tax, 4Th M Block, Circle – 1(1)(1), Rajajinagar, Vs. Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 010. Pan: Aaacc5890M Appellant Respondent : Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar, Assessee By Advocate : Shri Praveen Karanth, Cit- Revenue By Dr Date Of Hearing : 03-11-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 20-01-2023 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Final Assessment Order Dated 25/03/2022 Passed By Nfac, Delhi For A.Y. 2017-18 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “The Grounds Mentioned Herein By The Appellant Are Without Prejudice To One Another General Ground 1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Final Assessment Order Passed By National Faceless

For Respondent: Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar
Section 143(3)Section 92D

…own case in ITO v M/s. Madura Coats (P) Ltd. In ITA No. 1711 & 1712/Bang /2005 for assessment years 2005-06 & 2006-07 by order dated 28.09.2006;  Decision of Hon’ble Delhi Tribunal in case of Convergys Customer Management Group Inc v ADIT reported in (2013) 58 SOT 69;  Decision of Hon’ble Mumbai Tribunal in case of WNS North America Inc. v. ADIT reported in (2012) 152 TTJ 145;  Decision of Hon’ble Mumbai Tribunal in case of Wipro Ltd. v ITO reported in 133 Taxman 149; 8.11 In order to examine the element of FTS in respect of payments made towards payroll processing, reliance was placed on Explanation 2 to cla…

M/S. Madura Coats Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax., (International Transaction), Circle- 1(2), Bangalore

In the result, appeals filed by assessee for A

ITA 1345/BANG/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 May 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy Sit(It)A Nos. 1344 & 1345/Bang/2019 Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18 M/S. Madura Coats Pvt. The Deputy Ltd., Commissioner Of 7Th Floor, Jupiter Income Tax Prestige Technology (International Park, Vs. Taxation), Outer Ring Road, Circle – 1(2), Bangalore – 560 103. Bangalore. Pan: Aabcm8297K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Ajay Rotti, Ca : Shri Shehnawaz Ul Rahaman, Revenue By Addl. Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 13-04-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 31-05-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeals Are Filed By Assessee Against Order Dated 30.03.2019 Passed By Ld.Cit(A)-12, Bangalore For A.Ys. 2016-17 & 2017-18. It Is Submitted That The Issues Alleged By Assessee In Both These Years Are Identical & On Similar Facts. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are As Under: 2.1 Madura Coats Pvt Ltd (Mcpl) Is An Indian Company Carrying On The Business As Manufacturer & Merchant Of Sewing Threads & Other Goods, Possesses The Requisite Expertise & Experience By Virtue Of Having Several Qualified Personnel In Its Employment. During The Course Of Verification Conducted Us

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Rotti, CA
Section 195Section 201(1)

…own case in ITO v M/s. Madura Coats (P) Ltd. In ITA No. 1711 & 1712/Bang /2005 for assessment years 2005-06 & 2006-07 by order dated 28.09.2006;  Decision of Hon’ble Delhi Tribunal in case of Convergys Customer Management Group Inc v ADIT reported in (2013) 58 SOT 69;  Decision of Hon’ble Mumbai Tribunal in case of WNS North America Inc. v. ADIT reported in (2012) 152 TTJ 145;  Decision of Hon’ble Mumbai Tribunal in case of Wipro Ltd. v ITO reported in 133 Taxman 149; 11. The Ld.AR then submitted that, the payment in question also cannot be taxed as Fees for Technical Services (FTS). He placed reliance on Exp…

M/S. Madura Coats Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax., (International Transaction), Circle- 1(2), Bangalore

In the result, appeals filed by assessee for A

ITA 1344/BANG/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 May 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy Sit(It)A Nos. 1344 & 1345/Bang/2019 Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18 M/S. Madura Coats Pvt. The Deputy Ltd., Commissioner Of 7Th Floor, Jupiter Income Tax Prestige Technology (International Park, Vs. Taxation), Outer Ring Road, Circle – 1(2), Bangalore – 560 103. Bangalore. Pan: Aabcm8297K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Ajay Rotti, Ca : Shri Shehnawaz Ul Rahaman, Revenue By Addl. Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 13-04-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 31-05-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeals Are Filed By Assessee Against Order Dated 30.03.2019 Passed By Ld.Cit(A)-12, Bangalore For A.Ys. 2016-17 & 2017-18. It Is Submitted That The Issues Alleged By Assessee In Both These Years Are Identical & On Similar Facts. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are As Under: 2.1 Madura Coats Pvt Ltd (Mcpl) Is An Indian Company Carrying On The Business As Manufacturer & Merchant Of Sewing Threads & Other Goods, Possesses The Requisite Expertise & Experience By Virtue Of Having Several Qualified Personnel In Its Employment. During The Course Of Verification Conducted Us

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Rotti, CA
Section 195Section 201(1)

…own case in ITO v M/s. Madura Coats (P) Ltd. In ITA No. 1711 & 1712/Bang /2005 for assessment years 2005-06 & 2006-07 by order dated 28.09.2006;  Decision of Hon’ble Delhi Tribunal in case of Convergys Customer Management Group Inc v ADIT reported in (2013) 58 SOT 69;  Decision of Hon’ble Mumbai Tribunal in case of WNS North America Inc. v. ADIT reported in (2012) 152 TTJ 145;  Decision of Hon’ble Mumbai Tribunal in case of Wipro Ltd. v ITO reported in 133 Taxman 149; 11. The Ld.AR then submitted that, the payment in question also cannot be taxed as Fees for Technical Services (FTS). He placed reliance on Exp…

Convergys Customer Management Group Inc. v. ADIT (58 SOT 69) — Cited in 9 Judgments | BharatTax