DIT v. Ericsson Communication Ltd.

378 ITR 395High Court2015#12754 most cited
8

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2021.

Judgments citing DIT v. Ericsson Communication Ltd.

M/S TOYOTA KIRLOSKAR MOTOR P LTD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA/245/2018HC Karnataka24 Mar 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,M.G.S. KAMAL

Section 201(1)Section 260Section 260ASection 40a

…1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL I.T.A. NO.245 OF 2018 BETWEEN: M/S. TOYOTA KIRLOSKAR MOTOR (P) LTD., A LIMITED COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING ITS OFFICE AT PLOT NO.1 BIDADI IND. AREA, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT KARNATAKA-562109 REP. HEREIN BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY. ... APPELLANT (BY SRI. S.S. NAGANAND, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI. S. SRIRANGA, ADV.,) AND: INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS)-LTU, JSS TOWERS BSK III STAGE BANGALORE-560085.…

AT & T COMMUNICATION SERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6322/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Aug 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishiat& T Communication Services Vs. Dcit, India Pvt Ltd, Circle-2(1), Vatika Triangle, 3Rd Floor, New Delhi Sushant Lok-1, Block-A, Gurgaon Pan: Aacca8033E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K. M. Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Raman Chopra, CIT DR
Section 143Section 144CSection 153(1)Section 40

…ual of income to an identified vendor, the same cannot trigger a withholding tax liability on the part of the appellant. “ ii. Reliance is also placed on the decision of the Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in the case of a. DIT vs. Ericsson Communication Ltd (2015) 378 ITR 395 (Del.) wherein it was held that: 1. “22. In our view, mere passing of the book entries, which are reversed, would not give rise to an obligation to deduct TAS by the Assessee, as clearly, there is no debt that can be said to be acknowledged by the Assessee. Imposition of an obligation to deduct TAS in these circumstances would amount to enforcin…

AT & T GLOBAL NETWORK SERVICES (I) PVT LTD,GURGAON vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA No 1059/Del/2015 is partly allowed

ITA 1059/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri I. C. Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishiat & T Global Network Services Dcit, (India) Pvt Ltd., Circle-2(1), Vs. Vatika Lok-1, Block-A, Gurgaon New Delhi Pan:Aafca8810L (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, At & T Global Network Services Circle-2(1), (India) Pvt Ltd., Vs. New Delhi Vatika Lok-1, Block-A, Gurgaon Pan:Aafca8810L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Kanchan Kaushal, CAFor Respondent: Shri C N Swain CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 32Section 35ASection 36Section 37(1)

…on of tax at source being deducted. We also draw support from decisions relied upon by the assessee during the course of hearing to buttress its argument that no withholding tax obligation arises on the provisions: a. DIT vs. Ericsson Communication Ltd (2015) 378 ITR 395 (Del.) b. Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Pvt Ltd vs DCIT (2016) 383 ITR 59 (Kar.) c. Dishnet Wireless Ltd vs. DCIT ( Chennai Tribunal) 172 TTJ 394 ld DR Could not point out any contrary decision . Therefore respectfully following the above decisions and in light of the factual matrix of the case we are of the considered view that since…

ACIT, JAIPUR vs. R.F. PROPERTIES PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of Assessee in ITA No

ITA 565/JPR/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Jun 2017AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Rajive Sahai & Shri Ashish SharmaFor Respondent: Smt. Roshanta Meena (Addl. CIT)
Section 201Section 201(1)

…ght the consultancy was not provided and the amount was neither payable, nor paid and credit entry made provisionally, canceled subsequently. In support of the contention is that the reliance was placed upon the judgment of the DIT vs. Ericsson Communication 378 ITR 395(Delhi) and also reliance was placed upon the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Excel Industries 358 ITR 0295 (SC). 9.1 On the contrary, Ld. Departmental Representatives opposed the submission. 9.2 We have heard the rival contentions, perused the material available on record. The contention of the assessee is that no…

R.F. PROPERTIES PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of Assessee in ITA No

ITA 483/JPR/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Jun 2017AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Rajive Sahai & Shri Ashish SharmaFor Respondent: Smt. Roshanta Meena (Addl. CIT)
Section 201Section 201(1)

…ght the consultancy was not provided and the amount was neither payable, nor paid and credit entry made provisionally, canceled subsequently. In support of the contention is that the reliance was placed upon the judgment of the DIT vs. Ericsson Communication 378 ITR 395(Delhi) and also reliance was placed upon the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Excel Industries 358 ITR 0295 (SC). 9.1 On the contrary, Ld. Departmental Representatives opposed the submission. 9.2 We have heard the rival contentions, perused the material available on record. The contention of the assessee is that no…

SHOREWALA OVERSEAS,DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the Stay Application is dismissed

ITA 5634/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jun 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini

For Appellant: Sh. Repudaman Thakur, FCAFor Respondent: Sh. Bedobani Chaudhari, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 40Section 5

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘SMC’ NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, Accountant Member ITA No. 5634/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Shorewala Overseas, Vs Income Tax Officer, 9, Lancers Road, B.D. Estate, Ward-47(1), Timparpur, Delhi-110054 New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. ABLFS0193A S. A. No. 514/Del/2016 (In ITA No. 5634/Del/2016 Asst. Year: 2012-13) Shorewala Overseas, Vs Income Tax Officer, 9, Lancers Road, B.D. Estate, Ward-47(1), Timparpur, Delhi-110054 New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. ABLFS0193A Assessee by : Sh. Repudaman Thakur, FCA Revenue by : Sh. Bedobani Cha…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MOSER BAER PHOTOVOLTAIC LTD., DELHI

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1852/DEL/2015[2011-12 (F.Y. 2010-11)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jan 2017

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddyay: 2011-12 (Fy 2010-11) Acit, Circle 75(1) Vs. Moser Baer Photovoltaic Ltd. Room No.503, Aayakar Bhvn 43 B, Okhla Industrial Area Laxmi Nagar Phase Iii New Delhi 110 092 Delhi 110 020 Pan: Aaecm 4997 P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr.D.RFor Respondent: Sh. Neeraj Jain, Adv. &
Section 194J

…A) are at para 4.3 from pages 5 to 7 of his order which is not extracted for the sake of brevity. 3. After hearing rival contentions I find that the issue is no more res integra. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of DIT vs. Ericsson Communication Ltd. 378 ITR 395 (Del.) held as followed. “Held, dismissing the appeal, that assessee had denied any obligation for payment of royalty to its holding company in respect of a period prior to Sept.8, 2000 (i.e. the date of issuance of Press Note (2000 series) by the Govt. of India). The ITA 1852/Del/2015 A.Y. 2011-12 (FY 2010-11) Moser Baer Photovoltaic Ltd. entrie…

M/S.KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF

In the result, the appeals are allowed

ITA/750/2009HC Karnataka02 Feb 2016

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

Section 194Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 260

…er. 13. Learned counsel in support of his contention places reliance on the following Judgments: 1. [A] KEDARNATH JUTE MFG.CO.LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (1971) 82 ITR 0363 2. DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX vs ERICSSON COMMUNICATIONS LTD. ((2015) 378 ITR 395 (Delhi)) 14. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the revenue justifies the order and would contend that during the course of survey it was found that the assessee-company has made the provision for interest on belated payment for power purchased from different 12 power purchasers without deducting tax at source as evidence…

DIT v. Ericsson Communication Ltd. (378 ITR 395) — Cited in 8 Judgments | BharatTax