DCIT v. PanAmSat International Systems Inc.

9 SOT 100Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2006#3406 most cited

What is DCIT v. PanAmSat International Systems Inc. authority for?

Interconnect usage charges and roaming charges incurred for the use of standard facilities are not in the nature of Fees for Technical Services (FTS) if there is no human intervention in providing the services.

35

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

DCIT v. PanAmSat International Systems Inc · 9 SOT 100 · Fees for Technical Services · FTS · interconnect usage charges · roaming charges · standard facility · human intervention · international taxation

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 12Section 139(1) of the Income Tax ActSection 139(9) of the Income Tax ActSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 143(3) of the Income Tax ActSection 144C of the Income Tax Act

Issues it is cited on

section 9(l)(vii)section 206asection 206aasection 35abbuse of equipmentsection 35ddwaiver of loansection 9(l)section 9(l)(vi)section 44bbsection 44bsection 9(1)(vi)

Judgments citing DCIT v. PanAmSat International Systems Inc.

RELIANCE JIO INFOCOMM USA INC.,TEXAS vs. DCIT (IT) 4 (1) (1), MUMBAI

In the result appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 2991/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Apr 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth ()

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 153Section 9(1)(vi)Section 9(1)(vii)

…point of time in respect of the period following the expiry of the license. On the difference between a product with relatively simple technology, and a business secret. We note that, in case of DCIT v. PanAmSat International Systems Inc., reported in (2006) 9 SOT 100 , Hon’ble Delhi High Court distinguished the decision of Asia Satellite Telecommunication Co. Ltd. v. Dy. CITT reported in (2003) 85 ITD 478 and held as under:— 19. The question that first comes up for consideration is whether section 9(1)(vi) of the Income-tax Act, read with the Explanation 2 below thereto, is applicable. This also involves the su…

DCIT-5(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S VODAFONE IDEA LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the ground no

ITA 2987/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2015-16
Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…usage charges and roaming charges\nare incurred only for the use of standard facility which is not in the nature of FTS. The\nsame is supported by the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of DCIT\nvs. Pan Amsat International Systems Inc [2006] 9 SOT 100 (Delhi) and also the Delhi\nTribunal Bench decision in the case of Bharti Airtel Ltd. (supra). The ld. AR without\nprejudice have also argued that the IUC and roaming charges are not in the nature of\nFTS where there is no human intervention in providing the said services. The ld. AR\nhad relied on the decision of the CIT vs. Vodafone South Ltd. an…

VODAFONE IDEA LIMITED (FORMERLY IDEA CELLULAR LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT - 14(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the ground no

ITA 2150/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2015-16
Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…usage charges and roaming charges\nare incurred only for the use of standard facility which is not in the nature of FTS. The\nsame is supported by the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of DCIT\nvs. Pan Amsat International Systems Inc [2006] 9 SOT 100 (Delhi) and also the Delhi\nTribunal Bench decision in the case of Bharti Airtel Ltd. (supra). The ld. AR without\nprejudice have also argued that the IUC and roaming charges are not in the nature of\nFTS where there is no human intervention in providing the said services. The ld. AR\nhad relied on the decision of the CIT vs. Vodafone South Ltd. an…

DCIT - 14(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. IDEA CELLULAR LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the ground no

ITA 2179/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2013-14
Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…usage charges and roaming charges\nare incurred only for the use of standard facility which is not in the nature of FTS. The\nsame is supported by the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of DCIT\nvs. Pan Amsat International Systems Inc [2006] 9 SOT 100 (Delhi) and also the Delhi\nTribunal Bench decision in the case of Bharti Airtel Ltd. (supra). The ld. AR without\nprejudice have also argued that the IUC and roaming charges are not in the nature of\nFTS where there is no human intervention in providing the said services. The ld. AR\nhad relied on the decision of the CIT vs. Vodafone South Ltd. an…

DCIT - 14(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. IDEA CELLULAR LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the ground no

ITA 2178/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2011-12
Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…usage charges and roaming charges\nare incurred only for the use of standard facility which is not in the nature of FTS. The\nsame is supported by the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of DCIT\nvs. Pan Amsat International Systems Inc [2006] 9 SOT 100 (Delhi) and also the Delhi\nTribunal Bench decision in the case of Bharti Airtel Ltd. (supra). The ld. AR without\nprejudice have also argued that the IUC and roaming charges are not in the nature of\nFTS where there is no human intervention in providing the said services. The ld. AR\nhad relied on the decision of the CIT vs. Vodafone South Ltd. an…

IDEA CELLULAR LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT - 14(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the ground no

ITA 1777/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2014-15
Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…usage charges and roaming charges\nare incurred only for the use of standard facility which is not in the nature of FTS. The\nsame is supported by the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of DCIT\nvs. Pan Amsat International Systems Inc [2006] 9 SOT 100 (Delhi) and also the Delhi\nTribunal Bench decision in the case of Bharti Airtel Ltd. (supra). The ld. AR without\nprejudice have also argued that the IUC and roaming charges are not in the nature of\nFTS where there is no human intervention in providing the said services. The ld. AR\nhad relied on the decision of the CIT vs. Vodafone South Ltd. an…

IDEA CELLULAR LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT - 14(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the ground no

ITA 1775/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2011-12
Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…usage charges and roaming charges\nare incurred only for the use of standard facility which is not in the nature of FTS. The\nsame is supported by the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of DCIT\nvs. Pan Amsat International Systems Inc [2006] 9 SOT 100 (Delhi) and also the Delhi\nTribunal Bench decision in the case of Bharti Airtel Ltd. (supra). The ld. AR without\nprejudice have also argued that the IUC and roaming charges are not in the nature of\nFTS where there is no human intervention in providing the said services. The ld. AR\nhad relied on the decision of the CIT vs. Vodafone South Ltd. an…

DCIT - 14(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. IDEA CELLULAR LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the ground no

ITA 5945/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2012-13
Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…usage charges and roaming charges\nare incurred only for the use of standard facility which is not in the nature of FTS. The\nsame is supported by the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of DCIT\nvs. Pan Amsat International Systems Inc [2006] 9 SOT 100 (Delhi) and also the Delhi\nTribunal Bench decision in the case of Bharti Airtel Ltd. (supra). The ld. AR without\nprejudice have also argued that the IUC and roaming charges are not in the nature of\nFTS where there is no human intervention in providing the said services. The ld. AR\nhad relied on the decision of the CIT vs. Vodafone South Ltd. an…

IDEA CELLULAR LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT HQ (JUDL.) TO CIT-14, MUMBAI

In the result, the ground no

ITA 5765/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2012-13
Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…usage charges and roaming charges\nare incurred only for the use of standard facility which is not in the nature of FTS. The\nsame is supported by the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of DCIT\nvs. Pan Amsat International Systems Inc [2006] 9 SOT 100 (Delhi) and also the Delhi\nTribunal Bench decision in the case of Bharti Airtel Ltd. (supra). The ld. AR without\nprejudice have also argued that the IUC and roaming charges are not in the nature of\nFTS where there is no human intervention in providing the said services. The ld. AR\nhad relied on the decision of the CIT vs. Vodafone South Ltd. an…

M/S. IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED,INDORE vs. THE DCIT (TDS), INDORE

Appeals are allowed

ITA 111/IND/2015[2013-14 (Quarter 4)]Status: DisposedITAT Indore01 Aug 2024

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 194Section 194HSection 194JSection 201(1)

…ourt decision of Vodafone South would have binding effect on the Bangalore Tribunal. 3.5 Reliance is also placed on the following decisions: 1. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. [2017] 87 taxmann.com 152 (Delhi - Trib.) 2. Pan AmSat International Systems Inc. [2006] 9 SOT 100 (DELHI ITAT) 3. Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co Ltd [2011] 197 Taxman 263 (Delhi) 4. New Skies Satellite BV [2016] 68 Taxmann.com 8 (Delhi) 5. Neo Sport Broadcast (P.) Ltd. [2019] 107 Taxmann.com 17 (Bombay) 6. Viacom18 Media (P.) Ltd. [2022] 134 taxmann.com 243 (Mumbai -Trib.) - Para 9 page 656 of PB which has followed Bom HC decision in Neo…

M/S. IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED,INDORE vs. THE DCIT (TDS), INDORE

Appeals are allowed

ITA 110/IND/2015[2013-14 (for first three quarter)]Status: DisposedITAT Indore01 Aug 2024

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 194Section 194HSection 194JSection 201(1)

…ourt decision of Vodafone South would have binding effect on the Bangalore Tribunal. 3.5 Reliance is also placed on the following decisions: 1. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. [2017] 87 taxmann.com 152 (Delhi - Trib.) 2. Pan AmSat International Systems Inc. [2006] 9 SOT 100 (DELHI ITAT) 3. Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co Ltd [2011] 197 Taxman 263 (Delhi) 4. New Skies Satellite BV [2016] 68 Taxmann.com 8 (Delhi) 5. Neo Sport Broadcast (P.) Ltd. [2019] 107 Taxmann.com 17 (Bombay) 6. Viacom18 Media (P.) Ltd. [2022] 134 taxmann.com 243 (Mumbai -Trib.) - Para 9 page 656 of PB which has followed Bom HC decision in Neo…

M/S. IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED,INDORE vs. THE DCIT (TDS), INDORE

Appeals are allowed

ITA 109/IND/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore01 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 194Section 194HSection 194JSection 201(1)

…ourt decision of Vodafone South would have binding effect on the Bangalore Tribunal. 3.5 Reliance is also placed on the following decisions: 1. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. [2017] 87 taxmann.com 152 (Delhi - Trib.) 2. Pan AmSat International Systems Inc. [2006] 9 SOT 100 (DELHI ITAT) 3. Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co Ltd [2011] 197 Taxman 263 (Delhi) 4. New Skies Satellite BV [2016] 68 Taxmann.com 8 (Delhi) 5. Neo Sport Broadcast (P.) Ltd. [2019] 107 Taxmann.com 17 (Bombay) 6. Viacom18 Media (P.) Ltd. [2022] 134 taxmann.com 243 (Mumbai -Trib.) - Para 9 page 656 of PB which has followed Bom HC decision in Neo…

SNC LAVALIN INC.,DELHI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE INT. TAX 3(1)(2), DELHI

In the result, the Appeal of the assessee is allowed, the Stay Application of the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 3691/DEL/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jun 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Sh. S. K. Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 270ASection 9(1)(vii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘D’, NEW DELHI Before Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member, Sh. Anubhav Sharma, Judicial Member ITA No. 3691/Del/2023 : Asstt. Year: 2021-22 & SA No. 36/Del/2024 : : Asstt. Year: 2021-22 SNC Lavalin Inc., Vs ACIT, A-32, First Floor, Khasra No. 56, International Taxation, Village Amberahi, Sector-19, Circle-3(1)(2), Dwarka, New Delhi-110075 New Delhi-110002 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAKCS5626H Assessee by : Sh. S. K. Aggarwal, CA Revenue by : Sh. Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 02.04.2024 Date of Pronouncement: 25.06.2024 ORDER Per Dr. B. R. R. Ku…

IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED,INDORE vs. DCIT TDS, INDORE

ITA 265/IND/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Apr 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S Vodafone Idea Ltd. Cit (Tds), बनाम/ (Formerly M/S Idea Bhopal Vs. Cellular Ltd.), 139-140, Electronics Complex, Pardeshipura, Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) M/S Vodafone Idea Ltd. Dcit/Jcit (Tds), बनाम/ (Formerly M/S Idea Indore Vs. Cellular Ltd.), 139-140, Electronics Complex, Pardeshipura, Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent)

Section 194HSection 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 250Section 254(2)Section 263

…ourt decision of Vodafone South would have binding effect on the Bangalore Tribunal. 3.5 Reliance is also placed on the following decisions: 1. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. [2017] 87 taxmann.com 152 (Delhi - Trib.) 2. Pan AmSat International Systems Inc. [2006] 9 SOT 100 (DELHI ITAT) 3. Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co Ltd [2011] 197 Taxman 263 (Delhi) 4. New Skies Satellite BV [2016] 68 Taxmann.com 8 (Delhi) 5. Neo Sport Broadcast (P.) Ltd. [2019] 107 Taxmann.com 17 (Bombay) 6. Viacom18 Media (P.) Ltd. [2022] 134 taxmann.com 243 (Mumbai - Trib.) - Para 9 page 656 of PB which has followed Bom HC decision in Neo…

M/S. IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED,INDORE vs. THE CIT (TDS), BHOPAL

ITA 415/IND/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Apr 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S Vodafone Idea Ltd. Cit (Tds), बनाम/ (Formerly M/S Idea Bhopal Vs. Cellular Ltd.), 139-140, Electronics Complex, Pardeshipura, Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) M/S Vodafone Idea Ltd. Dcit/Jcit (Tds), बनाम/ (Formerly M/S Idea Indore Vs. Cellular Ltd.), 139-140, Electronics Complex, Pardeshipura, Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent)

Section 194HSection 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 250Section 254(2)Section 263

…ourt decision of Vodafone South would have binding effect on the Bangalore Tribunal. 3.5 Reliance is also placed on the following decisions: 1. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. [2017] 87 taxmann.com 152 (Delhi - Trib.) 2. Pan AmSat International Systems Inc. [2006] 9 SOT 100 (DELHI ITAT) 3. Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co Ltd [2011] 197 Taxman 263 (Delhi) 4. New Skies Satellite BV [2016] 68 Taxmann.com 8 (Delhi) 5. Neo Sport Broadcast (P.) Ltd. [2019] 107 Taxmann.com 17 (Bombay) 6. Viacom18 Media (P.) Ltd. [2022] 134 taxmann.com 243 (Mumbai - Trib.) - Para 9 page 656 of PB which has followed Bom HC decision in Neo…

KDDI CORPORATION,JAPAN vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE 2(1), BANGALORE, KARNATAKA, JAPAN

ITA 102/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahus.P. Nos. 7 To 9/Bang/2024 (In It(It)A Nos. 100 To 102/Bang/2024) & It(It)A Nos. 100 To 102/Bang/2024

For Appellant: Shri Arjit Prasad, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Subash K R, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(3)Section 147Section 148Section 201

…se of J&P Coats by the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal. 5.6 Reliance is placed on the following decisions that are referred to hereinabove: 1. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. [2017] 87 taxmann.com 152 (Delhi - Trib.) 2. Pan AmSat International Systems Inc. [2006] 9 SOT 100 (DELHI ITAT) 3. Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co Ltd [2011] 197 Taxman 263 (Delhi) 4. New Skies Satellite BV [2016] 68 Taxmann.com 8 (Delhi) Page 10 of 32 S.P. Nos. 7 to 9/Bang/2024 & IT(IT)A Nos. 100 to 102/Bang/2024 5. Neo Sport Broadcast (P.) Ltd. [2019] 107 Taxmann.com 17 (Bombay) 6. Viacom18 Media (P.) Ltd. [2022] 134 taxmann.com 243 (Mumb…

KDDI CORPORATION,JAPAN vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE 2(1), BANGALORE, KARNATAKA, BANGALORE

ITA 101/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Apr 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahus.P. Nos. 7 To 9/Bang/2024 (In It(It)A Nos. 100 To 102/Bang/2024) & It(It)A Nos. 100 To 102/Bang/2024

For Appellant: Shri Arjit Prasad, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Subash K R, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(3)Section 147Section 148Section 201

…se of J&P Coats by the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal. 5.6 Reliance is placed on the following decisions that are referred to hereinabove: 1. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. [2017] 87 taxmann.com 152 (Delhi - Trib.) 2. Pan AmSat International Systems Inc. [2006] 9 SOT 100 (DELHI ITAT) 3. Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co Ltd [2011] 197 Taxman 263 (Delhi) 4. New Skies Satellite BV [2016] 68 Taxmann.com 8 (Delhi) Page 10 of 32 S.P. Nos. 7 to 9/Bang/2024 & IT(IT)A Nos. 100 to 102/Bang/2024 5. Neo Sport Broadcast (P.) Ltd. [2019] 107 Taxmann.com 17 (Bombay) 6. Viacom18 Media (P.) Ltd. [2022] 134 taxmann.com 243 (Mumb…

KDDI CORPORATION,JAPAN vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE 2(1), BANGALORE, KARNATAKA, BANGALORE

ITA 100/BANG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahus.P. Nos. 7 To 9/Bang/2024 (In It(It)A Nos. 100 To 102/Bang/2024) & It(It)A Nos. 100 To 102/Bang/2024

For Appellant: Shri Arjit Prasad, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Subash K R, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(3)Section 147Section 148Section 201

…se of J&P Coats by the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal. 5.6 Reliance is placed on the following decisions that are referred to hereinabove: 1. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. [2017] 87 taxmann.com 152 (Delhi - Trib.) 2. Pan AmSat International Systems Inc. [2006] 9 SOT 100 (DELHI ITAT) 3. Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co Ltd [2011] 197 Taxman 263 (Delhi) 4. New Skies Satellite BV [2016] 68 Taxmann.com 8 (Delhi) Page 10 of 32 S.P. Nos. 7 to 9/Bang/2024 & IT(IT)A Nos. 100 to 102/Bang/2024 5. Neo Sport Broadcast (P.) Ltd. [2019] 107 Taxmann.com 17 (Bombay) 6. Viacom18 Media (P.) Ltd. [2022] 134 taxmann.com 243 (Mumb…

M/S. TELECOM ITALIA SPARKLE SINGAPORE PTE. LIMITED,SINGAPORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION- CIRCLE 2(1), BANGALORE

In the result, all the three appeals filed by assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 580/BANG/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(It)A Nos. 579 & 580/Bang/2020 Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2010-11 M/S. Telecom Italia The Deputy Sparkle Singapore Pte. Commissioner Of Ltd., Income Tax, 23-01, Suntec Tower (International Four, Taxation), 6 Temasek Boulevard, Vs. Circle – 2(1), Singapore – 038986 Bangalore. Pan: Aagct6780P Appellant Respondent & It(It)A No. 1138/Bang/2022 Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Ti Sparkle The Deputy Singapore Pte. Ltd., Commissioner Of 23-01, Suntec Tower Income Tax, Four, (International 6 Temasek Boulevard, Taxation), Singapore – 038986 Circle – 2(2), Vs. Pan: Aagct6780P Bangalore. Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Nischal .B, Addl. CIT (DR)
Section 148Section 195Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vi)

…se of J&P Coats by the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal. 7.6 Reliance is placed on the following decisions that are referred to hereinabove: 1. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. [2017] 87 taxmann.com 152 (Delhi - Trib.) 2. Pan AmSat International Systems Inc. [2006] 9 SOT 100 (DELHI ITAT) 3. Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co Ltd [2011] 197 Taxman 263 (Delhi) 4. New Skies Satellite BV [2016] 68 Taxmann.com 8 (Delhi) 5. Neo Sport Broadcast (P.) Ltd. [2019] 107 Taxmann.com 17 (Bombay) 6. Viacom18 Media (P.) Ltd. [2022] 134 taxmann.com 243 (Mumbai -Trib.) - Para 9 page 656 of PB which has followed Bom HC decision in Neo…

M/S. TELECOM ITALIA SPARKLE SINGAPORE PTE. LIMITED,SINGAPORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION- CIRCLE 2(1), BANGALORE

In the result, all the three appeals filed by assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 579/BANG/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Aug 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(It)A Nos. 579 & 580/Bang/2020 Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2010-11 M/S. Telecom Italia The Deputy Sparkle Singapore Pte. Commissioner Of Ltd., Income Tax, 23-01, Suntec Tower (International Four, Taxation), 6 Temasek Boulevard, Vs. Circle – 2(1), Singapore – 038986 Bangalore. Pan: Aagct6780P Appellant Respondent & It(It)A No. 1138/Bang/2022 Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Ti Sparkle The Deputy Singapore Pte. Ltd., Commissioner Of 23-01, Suntec Tower Income Tax, Four, (International 6 Temasek Boulevard, Taxation), Singapore – 038986 Circle – 2(2), Vs. Pan: Aagct6780P Bangalore. Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Nischal .B, Addl. CIT (DR)
Section 148Section 195Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vi)

…se of J&P Coats by the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal. 7.6 Reliance is placed on the following decisions that are referred to hereinabove: 1. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. [2017] 87 taxmann.com 152 (Delhi - Trib.) 2. Pan AmSat International Systems Inc. [2006] 9 SOT 100 (DELHI ITAT) 3. Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co Ltd [2011] 197 Taxman 263 (Delhi) 4. New Skies Satellite BV [2016] 68 Taxmann.com 8 (Delhi) 5. Neo Sport Broadcast (P.) Ltd. [2019] 107 Taxmann.com 17 (Bombay) 6. Viacom18 Media (P.) Ltd. [2022] 134 taxmann.com 243 (Mumbai -Trib.) - Para 9 page 656 of PB which has followed Bom HC decision in Neo…

Showing 1–20 of 35 · Page 1 of 2

DCIT v. PanAmSat International Systems Inc. (9 SOT 100) — Cited in 35 Judgments | BharatTax