DCIT v. Sulzer Bros (

249 ITR 418High Court2001#6016 most cited
19

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 13(4)Section 250Section 253Section 6(3)Section 90

Judgments citing DCIT v. Sulzer Bros (

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)

…g States "in deviation from the general principles of taxation applicable to the contracting States". Otherwise, the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement will have no meaning at all. [See also in this connection Leonhardt Andra Und Partner, GmbH v. CIT, (2001) 249 ITR 418 (Cal)] 25. In CIT v. R.M. Muthaiah [(1993) 202 ITR 508 (Kant)] the Karnataka High Court was concerned with DTAT between the Government of India and the Government of Malaysia. The High Court held that under the terms. of the Agreement, if there was a recognition of the power of taxation with the Malaysian Government, by implication it takes away…

The Commissioner of Income Tax - International Taxation -3 vs. Telstra Singapore Pte Ltd

ITA/334/2022HC Delhi24 Jul 2024

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 9

…ates ―in deviation from the general principles of taxation applicable to the contracting States‖. Otherwise, the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement will have no meaning at all. [See also in this connection Leonhardt Andra Und Partner, GmbH v. CIT, (2001) 249 ITR 418 (Cal)] 25. In CIT v. R.M. Muthaiah [(1993) 202 ITR 508 (Kant)] the Karnataka High Court was concerned with DTAT between the Government of India and the Government of Malaysia. The High Court held that under the terms of the Agreement, if there was a recognition of the power of taxation with the Malaysian Government, by implication it takes…

The Commissioner of Income Tax - International Taxation -3 vs. Telstra Singapore Pte Ltd

ITA/206/2023HC Delhi24 Jul 2024

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 9

…ates ―in deviation from the general principles of taxation applicable to the contracting States‖. Otherwise, the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement will have no meaning at all. [See also in this connection Leonhardt Andra Und Partner, GmbH v. CIT, (2001) 249 ITR 418 (Cal)] 25. In CIT v. R.M. Muthaiah [(1993) 202 ITR 508 (Kant)] the Karnataka High Court was concerned with DTAT between the Government of India and the Government of Malaysia. The High Court held that under the terms of the Agreement, if there was a recognition of the power of taxation with the Malaysian Government, by implication it takes…

The Commissioner of Income Tax - International Taxation -3 vs. Telstra Singapore Pte Ltd

ITA/61/2023HC Delhi24 Jul 2024

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 9

…ates ―in deviation from the general principles of taxation applicable to the contracting States‖. Otherwise, the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement will have no meaning at all. [See also in this connection Leonhardt Andra Und Partner, GmbH v. CIT, (2001) 249 ITR 418 (Cal)] 25. In CIT v. R.M. Muthaiah [(1993) 202 ITR 508 (Kant)] the Karnataka High Court was concerned with DTAT between the Government of India and the Government of Malaysia. The High Court held that under the terms of the Agreement, if there was a recognition of the power of taxation with the Malaysian Government, by implication it takes…

The Commissioner of Income Tax - International Taxation -3 vs. Telstra Singapore Pte Ltd

ITA/55/2023HC Delhi24 Jul 2024

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 9

…ates ―in deviation from the general principles of taxation applicable to the contracting States‖. Otherwise, the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement will have no meaning at all. [See also in this connection Leonhardt Andra Und Partner, GmbH v. CIT, (2001) 249 ITR 418 (Cal)] 25. In CIT v. R.M. Muthaiah [(1993) 202 ITR 508 (Kant)] the Karnataka High Court was concerned with DTAT between the Government of India and the Government of Malaysia. The High Court held that under the terms of the Agreement, if there was a recognition of the power of taxation with the Malaysian Government, by implication it takes…

M/S. Ariba Inc., Gurgaon vs. ADIT, New Delhi

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee stand partly

ITA 1470/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2022AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Sinha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 115ASection 182Section 234BSection 28Section 44DSection 9(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘D’ : NEW DELHI) SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI YOGESH KUMAR US, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.4582/Del./2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05) ITA No.4583/Del./2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06) ITA No.4584/Del./2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07) ITA No.6090/Del./2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08) ITA No.3923/Del./2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) ITA No.1538/Del./2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10) ITA No.1469/Del./2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11) ITA No.1470/Del./2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12) Ariba Inc., vs. DDIT, C/o Price Waterhouse Coopers, International Taxatio…

M/S. Ariba Inc., Gurgaon vs. ADIT, New Delhi

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee stand partly

ITA 1469/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2022AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Sinha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 115ASection 182Section 234BSection 28Section 44DSection 9(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘D’ : NEW DELHI) SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI YOGESH KUMAR US, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.4582/Del./2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05) ITA No.4583/Del./2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06) ITA No.4584/Del./2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07) ITA No.6090/Del./2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08) ITA No.3923/Del./2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) ITA No.1538/Del./2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10) ITA No.1469/Del./2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11) ITA No.1470/Del./2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12) Ariba Inc., vs. DDIT, C/o Price Waterhouse Coopers, International Taxatio…

Ariba Inc., New Delhi vs. ADIT, New Delhi

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee stand partly

ITA 1538/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2022AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Sinha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 115ASection 182Section 234BSection 28Section 44DSection 9(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘D’ : NEW DELHI) SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI YOGESH KUMAR US, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.4582/Del./2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05) ITA No.4583/Del./2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06) ITA No.4584/Del./2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07) ITA No.6090/Del./2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08) ITA No.3923/Del./2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) ITA No.1538/Del./2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10) ITA No.1469/Del./2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11) ITA No.1470/Del./2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12) Ariba Inc., vs. DDIT, C/o Price Waterhouse Coopers, International Taxatio…

Ariba Inc., New Delhi vs. ADIT, New Delhi

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee stand partly

ITA 3923/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2022AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Sinha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 115ASection 182Section 234BSection 28Section 44DSection 9(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘D’ : NEW DELHI) SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI YOGESH KUMAR US, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.4582/Del./2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05) ITA No.4583/Del./2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06) ITA No.4584/Del./2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07) ITA No.6090/Del./2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08) ITA No.3923/Del./2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) ITA No.1538/Del./2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10) ITA No.1469/Del./2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11) ITA No.1470/Del./2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12) Ariba Inc., vs. DDIT, C/o Price Waterhouse Coopers, International Taxatio…

Ariba Inc., New Delhi vs. ADIT, New Delhi

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee stand partly

ITA 6090/DEL/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2022AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Sinha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 115ASection 182Section 234BSection 28Section 44DSection 9(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘D’ : NEW DELHI) SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI YOGESH KUMAR US, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.4582/Del./2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05) ITA No.4583/Del./2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06) ITA No.4584/Del./2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07) ITA No.6090/Del./2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08) ITA No.3923/Del./2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) ITA No.1538/Del./2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10) ITA No.1469/Del./2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11) ITA No.1470/Del./2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12) Ariba Inc., vs. DDIT, C/o Price Waterhouse Coopers, International Taxatio…

Ariba Inc, New Delhi vs. ADIT (Intl Taxation), New Delhi

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee stand partly

ITA 4584/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2022AY 2006-07
For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Sinha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 115ASection 182Section 234BSection 28Section 44DSection 9(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘D’ : NEW DELHI) SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI YOGESH KUMAR US, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.4582/Del./2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05) ITA No.4583/Del./2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06) ITA No.4584/Del./2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07) ITA No.6090/Del./2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08) ITA No.3923/Del./2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) ITA No.1538/Del./2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10) ITA No.1469/Del./2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11) ITA No.1470/Del./2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12) Ariba Inc., vs. DDIT, C/o Price Waterhouse Coopers, International Taxatio…

Ariba Inc, New Delhi vs. ADIT (Intl Taxation), New Delhi

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee stand partly

ITA 4583/DEL/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2022AY 2005-06
For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Sinha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 115ASection 182Section 234BSection 28Section 44DSection 9(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘D’ : NEW DELHI) SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI YOGESH KUMAR US, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.4582/Del./2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05) ITA No.4583/Del./2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06) ITA No.4584/Del./2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07) ITA No.6090/Del./2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08) ITA No.3923/Del./2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) ITA No.1538/Del./2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10) ITA No.1469/Del./2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11) ITA No.1470/Del./2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12) Ariba Inc., vs. DDIT, C/o Price Waterhouse Coopers, International Taxatio…

Ariba Inc, New Delhi vs. ADIT (Intl Taxation), New Delhi

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee stand partly

ITA 4582/DEL/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2022AY 2004-05
For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Sinha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 115ASection 182Section 234BSection 28Section 44DSection 9(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘D’ : NEW DELHI) SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI YOGESH KUMAR US, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.4582/Del./2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05) ITA No.4583/Del./2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06) ITA No.4584/Del./2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07) ITA No.6090/Del./2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08) ITA No.3923/Del./2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) ITA No.1538/Del./2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10) ITA No.1469/Del./2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11) ITA No.1470/Del./2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12) Ariba Inc., vs. DDIT, C/o Price Waterhouse Coopers, International Taxatio…

Aveva Information Technology India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT-9(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 2176/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri G. Manjunatha, Am Aveva Information Technology Vs. Dcit-9(1) India Pvt.Ltd. Aaykar Bhawan, M.K.Road Unit No.202, ‘A’ Wing Mumbai-400 020 2Nd Floor, Supreme Business Park, Supreme City, Behind Lake Cstle, Hiranandani Gardens, Powai, Mumbai-400 076 Pan/Gir No.Aadca0847M Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 143(2)Section 195Section 234BSection 234CSection 271(1)(c)Section 40Section 9

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JM & SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, AM Aveva Information Technology Vs. DCIT-9(1) India Pvt.Ltd. Aaykar Bhawan, M.K.Road Unit No.202, ‘A’ Wing Mumbai-400 020 2nd Floor, Supreme Business Park, Supreme City, Behind Lake Cstle, Hiranandani Gardens, Powai, Mumbai-400 076 PAN/GIR No.AADCA0847M Appellant) .. Respondent) Assessee by Nitesh Joshi & Shivani Kotadia Revenue by Dr.Narendra Kumar Date of Hearing 20/06/2019 Date of Pronouncement 26/07/2019 आदेश आदेश / O R D E R आदेश आदेश PER G.MANJUNATHA (A.M): This appeal filed by the assessee is dir…

The ACIT, 1(1), Bhopal vs. M/S. Andritz Hydro Pvt. Ltd., Raisen

In the result, grounds taken by the assessee in all the years with respect to provision of warranty are allowed

ITA 349/IND/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Feb 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meena

Section 143(3)Section 144C

…ccrual of income to the Austrian company on account of its business activities in India. moreover, for taxability of Royalty, Permanent Establishment is not an essential criterion. (Also held in Leonhardt Andra Und Partner, Gmbh v. Commissioner of Income Tax; 249 ITR 418 (CAL). In view of the above it is held in the case of ‘VA Tech India’ that the payment made by the assessee is in the nature of Royalty. However, even if the claim of the assessee is taken up for arguments sake as payment for technical services still the payment shall be taxable @ 10% in India in view of the earlier discussion in this order. 6.14…

M/S Andritz Hydro Private Limited (Earlier Known As V A Tech Hydro Indai Pvt. Ltd.), Mandideep vs. The ACIT 1(1), Bhopal

In the result, grounds taken by the assessee in all the years with respect to provision of warranty are allowed

ITA 316/IND/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Feb 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meena

Section 143(3)Section 144C

…ccrual of income to the Austrian company on account of its business activities in India. moreover, for taxability of Royalty, Permanent Establishment is not an essential criterion. (Also held in Leonhardt Andra Und Partner, Gmbh v. Commissioner of Income Tax; 249 ITR 418 (CAL). In view of the above it is held in the case of ‘VA Tech India’ that the payment made by the assessee is in the nature of Royalty. However, even if the claim of the assessee is taken up for arguments sake as payment for technical services still the payment shall be taxable @ 10% in India in view of the earlier discussion in this order. 6.14…

The DCIT, 1(1), Bhopal vs. M/S. Andritz Hydro Pvt. Ltd., Raisen

In the result, grounds taken by the assessee in all the years with respect to provision of warranty are allowed

ITA 265/IND/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Feb 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meena

Section 143(3)Section 144C

…ccrual of income to the Austrian company on account of its business activities in India. moreover, for taxability of Royalty, Permanent Establishment is not an essential criterion. (Also held in Leonhardt Andra Und Partner, Gmbh v. Commissioner of Income Tax; 249 ITR 418 (CAL). In view of the above it is held in the case of ‘VA Tech India’ that the payment made by the assessee is in the nature of Royalty. However, even if the claim of the assessee is taken up for arguments sake as payment for technical services still the payment shall be taxable @ 10% in India in view of the earlier discussion in this order. 6.14…

M/S. Andritz Hydro Private Limited (Earlier Known As Va Tech Hydro India Private Limited), Bhopal vs. The DCIT 1(1), Bhopal

In the result, grounds taken by the assessee in all the years with respect to provision of warranty are allowed

ITA 157/IND/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Feb 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meena

Section 143(3)Section 144C

…ccrual of income to the Austrian company on account of its business activities in India. moreover, for taxability of Royalty, Permanent Establishment is not an essential criterion. (Also held in Leonhardt Andra Und Partner, Gmbh v. Commissioner of Income Tax; 249 ITR 418 (CAL). In view of the above it is held in the case of ‘VA Tech India’ that the payment made by the assessee is in the nature of Royalty. However, even if the claim of the assessee is taken up for arguments sake as payment for technical services still the payment shall be taxable @ 10% in India in view of the earlier discussion in this order. 6.14…

Director of Income Tax vs. Infrasoft Ltd

ITA/1034/2009HC Delhi22 Nov 2013
Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 4Section 9(1)(vi)

…es “in deviation from the general principles of taxation applicable to the contracting States”. Otherwise, the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement will have no meaning at all. [See also in this connection Leonhardt Andra Und Partner, GmbH v. CIT, (2001) 249 ITR 418 (Cal)] 25. In CIT v. R.M. Muthaiah [(1993) 202 ITR 508 (Kant)] the Karnataka High Court was concerned with DTAT between the Government of India and the Government of Malaysia. The High Court held that under the terms of the Agreement, if there was a recognition of the power of taxation with the Malaysian Government, by implication it…

DCIT v. Sulzer Bros ( (249 ITR 418) — Cited in 19 Judgments | BharatTax