Dieter Eberhard Gustav v. CIT

235 ITR 698Reported decision#8896 most cited

What is Dieter Eberhard Gustav v. CIT authority for?

Income from services is not to be treated as Fees for Technical Services (FTS) if it does not fall within the definition of FTS under relevant Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements (DTAAs), and thus, deduction under section 40(a)(ia) is not warranted. If an applicant's case falls under a more beneficial provision, it is futile to interpret it under another provision of a treaty or the Income-tax Act.

12

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2024.

Also referred to as

Dieter Eberhard Gustav v CIT · fees for included services · FTS · section 40(a)(ia) · DTAA · beneficial provision · interpretation of treaty · Income-tax Act

Issues it is cited on

section 40(a)(1)section 248section 9(1)(vii)(b)section 195(1)section 195(2)fees for included servicesinterest free advancesbusiness connectionsection 9(1)(vi)section 40(a)(i)section 9(1)(vii)enduring benefit

Judgments citing Dieter Eberhard Gustav v. CIT

Rane Engine Valve Ltd, Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle-5(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 in ITA No

ITA 885/CHNY/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Suresh, JCIT
Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘डी’ "यायपीठ,चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी महावीर "सह, उपा"य" एवं"ी अिमताभ शु"ला, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 1497, 1498/CHNY/2017, 1477, 2815/CHNY/2018 & 885/CHNY/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Rane Engine Valve Limited, The Deputy Commissioner of “Maithri”, No.132, Vs. Income Tax, Cathedral Road, Corporate Circle 5(1), Chennai – 600 086. Chennai. PAN: AAACT 1279M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क"…

Rane Engine Valve Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 5(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 in ITA No

ITA 2815/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Suresh, JCIT
Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘डी’ "यायपीठ,चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी महावीर "सह, उपा"य" एवं"ी अिमताभ शु"ला, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 1497, 1498/CHNY/2017, 1477, 2815/CHNY/2018 & 885/CHNY/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Rane Engine Valve Limited, The Deputy Commissioner of “Maithri”, No.132, Vs. Income Tax, Cathedral Road, Corporate Circle 5(1), Chennai – 600 086. Chennai. PAN: AAACT 1279M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क"…

Rane Engine Valve Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 5 (1), Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 in ITA No

ITA 1477/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Suresh, JCIT
Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘डी’ "यायपीठ,चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी महावीर "सह, उपा"य" एवं"ी अिमताभ शु"ला, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 1497, 1498/CHNY/2017, 1477, 2815/CHNY/2018 & 885/CHNY/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Rane Engine Valve Limited, The Deputy Commissioner of “Maithri”, No.132, Vs. Income Tax, Cathedral Road, Corporate Circle 5(1), Chennai – 600 086. Chennai. PAN: AAACT 1279M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क"…

Rane Engine Valves Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 in ITA No

ITA 1498/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Suresh, JCIT
Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘डी’ "यायपीठ,चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी महावीर "सह, उपा"य" एवं"ी अिमताभ शु"ला, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 1497, 1498/CHNY/2017, 1477, 2815/CHNY/2018 & 885/CHNY/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Rane Engine Valve Limited, The Deputy Commissioner of “Maithri”, No.132, Vs. Income Tax, Cathedral Road, Corporate Circle 5(1), Chennai – 600 086. Chennai. PAN: AAACT 1279M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क"…

Rane Engine Valves Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 in ITA No

ITA 1497/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Suresh, JCIT
Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘डी’ "यायपीठ,चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी महावीर "सह, उपा"य" एवं"ी अिमताभ शु"ला, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 1497, 1498/CHNY/2017, 1477, 2815/CHNY/2018 & 885/CHNY/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Rane Engine Valve Limited, The Deputy Commissioner of “Maithri”, No.132, Vs. Income Tax, Cathedral Road, Corporate Circle 5(1), Chennai – 600 086. Chennai. PAN: AAACT 1279M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क"…

M/S. Mira Exim Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 3714/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Dr.B.R.R.Kumar

Section 234Section 40

…tion 9(2), similar treatment would arise. As far as this is concerned, the Court notices that the ITAT relied upon the interpretation given to similar provisions of various DTAAs in Cushman & Wakefield Pte. Ltd. in Re.305 ITR 208; Dieter Eberhard Gustav v CIT 235 ITR 698 etc. and held that since these were not in the nature of FTS., the deduction under section 40(a)(ia) was not warranted. Reliance by the Revenue upon the retrospective amendment, in the opinions of this Court, is not justified, given the ruling in Director of Income tax vs New Skies Satellite BVV (2016) 382 ITR 114 (Del.). No question of law, ther…

M/S. Mira Exim Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 3713/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Dr.B.R.R.Kumar

Section 234Section 40

…tion 9(2), similar treatment would arise. As far as this is concerned, the Court notices that the ITAT relied upon the interpretation given to similar provisions of various DTAAs in Cushman & Wakefield Pte. Ltd. in Re.305 ITR 208; Dieter Eberhard Gustav v CIT 235 ITR 698 etc. and held that since these were not in the nature of FTS., the deduction under section 40(a)(ia) was not warranted. Reliance by the Revenue upon the retrospective amendment, in the opinions of this Court, is not justified, given the ruling in Director of Income tax vs New Skies Satellite BVV (2016) 382 ITR 114 (Del.). No question of law, ther…

M/S. Wifi Networks P Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, appeal field by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2325/BANG/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Oct 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V Vasudevan, Vice Presidnet & Shri B.R Baskaranassessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Sudheendra B.R, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 40Section 40aSection 9(1)(vi)

…IT v. Copes Vulcan Inc. [1987] 167 ITR 884 ; [1987] 30 Taxmann 549, [2004] 267 ITR 209 (Kar) in AEG AKTIENGESLLSCHAFT v. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX. Furthermore, we also draw support from the Advance Ruling in Case of Dieter Eberhand Gustav Van Der Mark V CIT 235 ITR 698 (AAR) where it ruled that, if the applicant’s case falls under a more beneficial provision, it would be futile to stretch the interpretation to bring it under some other provision of the treaty or the Income-tax Act. This position is too well established to require ITA Nos.2325/Bang/2016 1198/Bang/2017 Page 21 of 26 any further elaboration. In…

M/S Wifi Networks Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-17(1)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 943/BANG/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Apr 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Wifi Networks P Ltd., The Deputy No. 427, 80 Feet Circular Commissioner Of Road, Vs. Income Tax, 6Th Block, Koramangala, Circle 7 (1) (2), Bangalore – 560 095. Bangalore. Pan: Aaacw5293L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri B.R. Sudheendra, Ca Revenue By : Shri T.N. Prakash, Addl. Cit (Dr)

For Appellant: Shri B.R. Sudheendra, CAFor Respondent: Shri T.N. Prakash, Addl. CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

…IT v. Copes Vulcan Inc. [1987] 167 ITR 884 ; [1987] 30 Taxmann 549, [2004] 267 ITR 209 (Kar) in AEG AKTIENGESLLSCHAFT v. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX. Furthermore, we also draw support from the Advance Ruling in Case of Dieter Eberhand Gustav Van Der Mark V CIT 235 ITR 698 (AAR) where it ruled that, if the applicant’s case falls under a more beneficial provision, it would be futile to stretch the interpretation to bring it under some other provision of the treaty or the Income-tax Act. This position is too well established to require any further elaboration. In this Case AAR was rendering advance ruling in identica…

M/S. Poddar Pigments Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Accordingly, the solitary ground of the appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12 is allowed

ITA 5086/DEL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishim/S. Poddar Pigments Ltd, Vs. Acit, A-283, Ground Floor, Circle-14(1), Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-I, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaacp1125E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmed, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40Section 9(1)

…IT v. Copes Vulcan Inc. [1987] 167 ITR 884 ; [1987] 30 Taxmann 549, [2004] 267 ITR 209 (Kar) in AEG AKTIENGESLLSCHAFT v. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX. Furthermore, we also draw support from the Advance Ruling in Case of Dieter Eberhand Gustav Van Der Mark V CIT 235 ITR 698 (AAR) where it ruled that, if the applicant‟s case falls under a more beneficial provision, it would be futile to stretch the interpretation to bring it under some other provision of the treaty or the Income-tax Act. This position is too well established to require any further elaboration. In this Case AAR was rendering advance ruling in identica…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-6 vs. Mira Exim Ltd

ITA/1084/2017HC Delhi29 Nov 2017

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40Section 9(2)

…(2), similar treatment would arise. As far as this is concerned, the Court notices that the ITAT relied upon the interpretation given to similar provisions of various DTAAs in Cushman & Wakefield Pte. Ltd. in Re. 305 ITR 208; Dieter Eberhard Gustav v. CIT 235 ITR 698 etc. and held that since these were not in the nature of FTS, the deduction under Section 40(a)(ia) was not warranted. Reliance by the Revenue upon the retrospective amendment, in the opinion of this Court, is not justified, given the ruling in Director of Income Tax v. New Skies Satellite BV (2016) 382 ITR 114 (Del). No question of law, the…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Mira Exim Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal of the Revenue and the Cross Objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 125/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Apr 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri B.P. Jainassessment Year 2009-10 Dcit, Vs. Mira Exim Ltd. Circle-6(1), Room No.413, 523-24, World Trade C.R. Building I.P. Estate, Centre, New Delhi. Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan: Aaacm 2066M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Respondent: S/Shri H.K. Chaudhary CIT-DR and Rajesh Kumar, Sr.D.R
Section 40Section 9Section 9(1)(vii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI I.C. SUDHIR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.P. JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment year 2009-10 DCIT, Vs. Mira Exim Ltd. Circle-6(1), Room No.413, 523-24, World Trade C.R. Building I.P. Estate, Centre, New Delhi. Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. PAN: AAACM 2066M (Appellant) (Respondent) CO No.256/Del/2014 Assessment year 2009-10 Mira Exim Ltd. Vs. DCIT, 523-24, World Trade Centre, Circle-6(1), Room Barakhamba Road, New No.413, Delhi. C.R. Building I.P. PAN: AAACM 2066M Estate, New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue by : S/Shri H.K. Chaudhar…

Dieter Eberhard Gustav v. CIT (235 ITR 698) — Cited in 12 Judgments | BharatTax