DIT v. Guy Carpenter & Co Ltd.

346 ITR 504High Court2012#566 most cited

What is DIT v. Guy Carpenter & Co Ltd. authority for?

For fees for technical services to be taxable under a tax treaty's 'make available' clause, a transfer of technology enabling the recipient to independently perform the service in the future is necessary, beyond mere service rendition. The case also clarifies that re-insurance services do not constitute 'imparting' of information taxable as royalty.

171

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

DIT v. Guy Carpenter & Co Ltd. · Section 9(1)(vii) · fees for technical services · FTS make available clause · tax treaty · transfer of technology · royalty · re-insurance income · Section 90(2) · Income-tax Act 1961 · enduring benefit · make available condition

Also reported as

20 Taxmann.com 807207 Taxmann 121

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 9(1)(vii)Section 1961Section 144C(13)Section 234BSection 270ASection 144C(3)Section 234D

Issues it is cited on

make available clausefees for included servicesmake available conditionsection 9(1)(vii)section 9(l)section 90(2)fees for technical servicesenduring benefitsection 44bbsection 9(1)tax treatysection 44b

Judgments citing DIT v. Guy Carpenter & Co Ltd.

Cooper Bussmann India Private Limited, Pondicherry vs. ACIT, Pondicherry

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for the assessment years 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-

ITA 1563/CHNY/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Nov 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.1559 To 1563, 2592 - 2594/Chny/2014) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2001-02 To 2008-09) Vs The Acit, M/S. Cooper Bussmann India Pvt. Ltd., Circle – 1, 34, Evr Street, Sedarapet, Pondicherry. Pondicherry - 605 111. Pan: Aabcs 0431R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos. 1662 & 1663/Chny/2016 & 178/Chny/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 To 2011-12) Vs The Jcit, M/S. Cooper Bussmann India Pvt. Ltd., Range – 1, 34, Evr Street, Sedarapet, Pondicherry. Pondicherry - 605 111. Pan: Aabcs 0431R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Vishal Kalra, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri M. Srinivasa Rao, Cit

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Srinivasa Rao, CIT
Section 80ISection 80l

…e, experience or skill to the assessee which could be utilized / applied by it independently. Therefore the above payments are not covered under FTS under the India UK DTAA. The ld.AR relied on the following case laws:- 1. Guy Carpenter & Co. Limited : [2012] 346 ITR 504 (Del) 2. CIT vs. De Beers India Mineral (P) Ltd : 346 ITR 467 (Kar) 3. ACIT vs. Vishwak Solutions (P) Ltd: [2015] 38 ITR (T) 522 (Mad) 4.2 Per contra, the ld.DR supported the orders of the lower authorities. 4.3 We heard the rival submissions and gone through the relevant material. Since the payment is towards certification, it is purely profes…

Cooper Bussmann India Private Limited, Pondicherry vs. ACIT, Pondicherry

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for the assessment years 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-

ITA 1559/CHNY/2014[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Nov 2019AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.1559 To 1563, 2592 - 2594/Chny/2014) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2001-02 To 2008-09) Vs The Acit, M/S. Cooper Bussmann India Pvt. Ltd., Circle – 1, 34, Evr Street, Sedarapet, Pondicherry. Pondicherry - 605 111. Pan: Aabcs 0431R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos. 1662 & 1663/Chny/2016 & 178/Chny/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 To 2011-12) Vs The Jcit, M/S. Cooper Bussmann India Pvt. Ltd., Range – 1, 34, Evr Street, Sedarapet, Pondicherry. Pondicherry - 605 111. Pan: Aabcs 0431R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Vishal Kalra, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri M. Srinivasa Rao, Cit

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Srinivasa Rao, CIT
Section 80ISection 80l

…e, experience or skill to the assessee which could be utilized / applied by it independently. Therefore the above payments are not covered under FTS under the India UK DTAA. The ld.AR relied on the following case laws:- 1. Guy Carpenter & Co. Limited : [2012] 346 ITR 504 (Del) 2. CIT vs. De Beers India Mineral (P) Ltd : 346 ITR 467 (Kar) 3. ACIT vs. Vishwak Solutions (P) Ltd: [2015] 38 ITR (T) 522 (Mad) 4.2 Per contra, the ld.DR supported the orders of the lower authorities. 4.3 We heard the rival submissions and gone through the relevant material. Since the payment is towards certification, it is purely profes…

H.J. Heinz Company, Usa, Mumbai vs. ACIT, New Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1991/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleh. J. Heinz Company, Usa Vs Adit 7Th Floor, D-Shivsagar Estate, Circle-1(2) Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli International Taxation Mumabi New Delhi Aacch2144P (Respondent) (Appellant) H. J. Heinz Company, Usa Vs Acit 7Th Floor, D-Shivsagar Estate, Circle-2(1)(1), Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli International Taxation, Mumabi Room No. 410, 4Th Floor, E- Aacch2144P Z Block, Pratyaksh Kar (Appellant) Bhawan New Delhi (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 234BSection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 9(1)(vi)Section 9(1)(vii)

…resaid principle has also been upheld in the following decisions wherein the concept of ‘making available’ has been discussed in detail and the issue is ruled in favour of the tax payers. i) US Technology Resources (P) Ltd. 407 ITR 327 ii) Guy Carpenter & Co. 346 ITR 504 (Del HC) iii) De Beers India Minerals (P) Ltd. 346 ITR 467 iv) Raymond Ltd. 86 ITD 791 v) Koninklijke Philips Electronics Pvt. N. V. (2018) 99 taxmann.com 23 vi) Exxon Mobil Company India (P) Ltd. (2018) 92 taxmann.com 5 vii) Bombardier Transportation India (P) Ltd. 162 ITD 586 viii) Timken Company (2017) 88 taxmann.com 21 ix) Outotec Oyj (2017)…

H.J. Heinz Company, Usa, Mumbai vs. ADIT, New Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6252/DEL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleh. J. Heinz Company, Usa Vs Adit 7Th Floor, D-Shivsagar Estate, Circle-1(2) Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli International Taxation Mumabi New Delhi Aacch2144P (Respondent) (Appellant) H. J. Heinz Company, Usa Vs Acit 7Th Floor, D-Shivsagar Estate, Circle-2(1)(1), Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli International Taxation, Mumabi Room No. 410, 4Th Floor, E- Aacch2144P Z Block, Pratyaksh Kar (Appellant) Bhawan New Delhi (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 234BSection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 9(1)(vi)Section 9(1)(vii)

…resaid principle has also been upheld in the following decisions wherein the concept of ‘making available’ has been discussed in detail and the issue is ruled in favour of the tax payers. i) US Technology Resources (P) Ltd. 407 ITR 327 ii) Guy Carpenter & Co. 346 ITR 504 (Del HC) iii) De Beers India Minerals (P) Ltd. 346 ITR 467 iv) Raymond Ltd. 86 ITD 791 v) Koninklijke Philips Electronics Pvt. N. V. (2018) 99 taxmann.com 23 vi) Exxon Mobil Company India (P) Ltd. (2018) 92 taxmann.com 5 vii) Bombardier Transportation India (P) Ltd. 162 ITD 586 viii) Timken Company (2017) 88 taxmann.com 21 ix) Outotec Oyj (2017)…

Ac Nielsen Corporation, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Tax) 1(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result the Ground No

ITA 7216/MUM/2017[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jul 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Pawan Singhita No. 7217/Mum/2017 (Assessment Year 2005-06) The Nielsen Company Dcit (It) -1(1)(1) C/O Nielsen (India) Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhawan, Maharshi 6Th Floor, Block-C, Godrej It Karve Road, Park, 02 Godrej Business, Mumbai. -400020 Vs. District, Phirojshah Nagar, Lbs Marg, Vikhroli (W), Mumbai-400079. Pan: Aaec8632R Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Madhur Agrawal (Ar)

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal (AR)For Respondent: Sh. Nishant Samaiya (Sr. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 244ASection 253Section 254(1)Section 9(1)(vi)

…IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 7217/Mum/2017 (Assessment Year 2005-06) The Nielsen Company DCIT (IT) -1(1)(1) C/o Nielsen (India) Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhawan, Maharshi 6th Floor, Block-C, Godrej IT Karve Road, Park, 02 Godrej Business, Mumbai. -400020 Vs. District, Phirojshah Nagar, LBS Marg, Vikhroli (W), Mumbai-400079. PAN: AAEC8632R Appellant Respondent Appellant by : Shri Madhur Agrawal (AR) Respondent by : Sh. Nishant Samaiya (Sr. DR) Date of Hearing : 22.07.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 22 .07.2019…

The Nielsen Company (Us) Llc, Mumbai vs. DDIT (It) 4(2), Mumbai

In the result the Ground No

ITA 4362/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Pawan Singhthe Nielsen Company (Us) Dcit (It) - 4(2) Llc, C/O Nielsen (India) Pvt. Mumbai. Ltd., 6Th Floor, Block-C, Godrej Vs. It Park, 02 Godrej Business, District, Phirojshah Nagar, Lbs Marg, Vikhroli (W), Mumbai-400079. Pan: Aacfj7526Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri P.J. Pardiwala With Sh. Madhur Agrawal (Ars) Respondent By : Shri Himanshu Sharma & Sh. Nishant Samaiya (Sr. Drs)

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwala with ShFor Respondent: Shri Himanshu Sharma and Sh. Nishant Samaiya (Sr. DRs)
Section 143(3)Section 144C(3)Section 234BSection 253Section 254(1)

…ble'. 16. As for the connotations of make available clause in the treaty, this issue is no longer res integra. There are at least two non-jurisdictional High Court decisions, namely Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of DIT v. Guy Carpenter & Co Ltd [2012] 346 ITR 504/207 Taxman 121/20 taxmann.com 807 and Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. De Beers India Minerals (P.) Ltd [2012] 346 ITR 467/208 Taxman 406/21 taxmann.com 214 in favour of the assessee, and there is no contrary decision by Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court or by Hon'ble Supreme Court. In De Beers case (supra), Their Lordships pose…

John Deere Eqipment P. Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Director of Income-Tax

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 908/PUN/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jan 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.905 & 906/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2007-08 & 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: S/Shri Ajay Modi, Pankaj Garg and Sudhendu Das
Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vi)

…this clause that the services should enable the person acquiring the services to apply technology contained therein. There are at least two non-jurisdictional High Court decisions, namely Hon‘ble Delhi High Court in the case of DIT Vs Guy Carpenter & Co Ltd (346 ITR 504) and Hon‘ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs De Beers India Pvt Ltd (346 ITR 467) in support of this proposition, and there is no contrary decision by Hon‘ble jurisdictional High Court or by Hon‘ble Supreme Court. We, therefore, hold that unless there is a transfer of technology involved in technical services extended by the UK based c…

John Deere Eqipment P. Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Director of Income-Tax

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 907/PUN/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jan 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.905 & 906/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2007-08 & 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: S/Shri Ajay Modi, Pankaj Garg and Sudhendu Das
Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vi)

…this clause that the services should enable the person acquiring the services to apply technology contained therein. There are at least two non-jurisdictional High Court decisions, namely Hon‘ble Delhi High Court in the case of DIT Vs Guy Carpenter & Co Ltd (346 ITR 504) and Hon‘ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs De Beers India Pvt Ltd (346 ITR 467) in support of this proposition, and there is no contrary decision by Hon‘ble jurisdictional High Court or by Hon‘ble Supreme Court. We, therefore, hold that unless there is a transfer of technology involved in technical services extended by the UK based c…

John Deere India Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Director of Income-Tax

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 906/PUN/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jan 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.905 & 906/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2007-08 & 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: S/Shri Ajay Modi, Pankaj Garg and Sudhendu Das
Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vi)

…this clause that the services should enable the person acquiring the services to apply technology contained therein. There are at least two non-jurisdictional High Court decisions, namely Hon‘ble Delhi High Court in the case of DIT Vs Guy Carpenter & Co Ltd (346 ITR 504) and Hon‘ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs De Beers India Pvt Ltd (346 ITR 467) in support of this proposition, and there is no contrary decision by Hon‘ble jurisdictional High Court or by Hon‘ble Supreme Court. We, therefore, hold that unless there is a transfer of technology involved in technical services extended by the UK based c…

John Deere India Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Director of Income-Tax

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 905/PUN/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jan 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.905 & 906/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2007-08 & 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: S/Shri Ajay Modi, Pankaj Garg and Sudhendu Das
Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vi)

…this clause that the services should enable the person acquiring the services to apply technology contained therein. There are at least two non-jurisdictional High Court decisions, namely Hon‘ble Delhi High Court in the case of DIT Vs Guy Carpenter & Co Ltd (346 ITR 504) and Hon‘ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs De Beers India Pvt Ltd (346 ITR 467) in support of this proposition, and there is no contrary decision by Hon‘ble jurisdictional High Court or by Hon‘ble Supreme Court. We, therefore, hold that unless there is a transfer of technology involved in technical services extended by the UK based c…

Ongc As Representative Assessee of National Mining Research Centre, Russia, Dehradun vs. ADIT, Dehradun

In the result, whereas assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 441/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jan 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.D. Agarwal & Shri K.Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2007-08

Section 115ASection 44Section 44BSection 9(1)(vii)

…sident recipient‘make available’the technology/skill/know-how to the recipient, which is ONGC in the present case, enabling the ONGC to apply such knowledge in future. For this proposition he placed reliance on the decisions in DIT vs. Guy Carpenter& Co. Ltd 346 ITR 504; CIT vs. De Beers India minerals (P.) Ltd 346 ITR 467; DDIT RSS ONGC in ITA No. 4989/mum/2012; KPMG vs. ACIT in ITA No. 6286/mum/2012; ACIT vs. BSR and company 70 taxman.com 69. 6. He further submitted that in the case of ONGC, the vendor had only provided services mainly in the nature of survey report/feasibility study reports to the ONGC and di…

ADIT, Dehradun vs. M/S. Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Ltd., Dehradun

In the result, whereas assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 4982/DEL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jan 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G.D. Agarwal & Shri K.Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2007-08

Section 115ASection 44Section 44BSection 9(1)(vii)

…sident recipient‘make available’the technology/skill/know-how to the recipient, which is ONGC in the present case, enabling the ONGC to apply such knowledge in future. For this proposition he placed reliance on the decisions in DIT vs. Guy Carpenter& Co. Ltd 346 ITR 504; CIT vs. De Beers India minerals (P.) Ltd 346 ITR 467; DDIT RSS ONGC in ITA No. 4989/mum/2012; KPMG vs. ACIT in ITA No. 6286/mum/2012; ACIT vs. BSR and company 70 taxman.com 69. 6. He further submitted that in the case of ONGC, the vendor had only provided services mainly in the nature of survey report/feasibility study reports to the ONGC and di…

Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd., Dehradun vs. ITO, Dehradun

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

ITA 6723/DEL/2015[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kantasstt. Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav JainFor Respondent: Smt. Naine Soin Kapil, Sr. DR
Section 115ASection 195(2)Section 28Section 44Section 44BSection 44D

…ees for technical services under India-USA DTAA, as no technical knowledge, skill, know how etc. was made available to the assessee. The issue in question is no more res integra in view of the following judgments :- 1. DIT vs. Guy Carpenter & Co. Ltd. (2012) 346 ITR 504 2. CIT vs. De Beers India Minerals (P) Ltd. 346 ITR 467 9. Thus the amount paid by ONGC to the NRC can be brought to tax only under article 7 of the Indo-USA DTAA as business profit, provided the NRC has a Permanent Establishment (PE) in India and the profit in question is attributable to such PE. Admittedly NRC does not have PE in India. Under t…

Anjani Synthetics Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 3594/AHD/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Dec 2018AY 2012-13
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

…ty, this issue is no longer res integra. There are at least two non-jurisdictional High Court decisions, namely Hon'ble Delhi Anjani Synthetics Ltd Vs. DCIT Assessment year: 2012-13 Page 3 of 4 High Court in the case of DIT v. Guy Carpenter & Co Ltd. [2012] 346 ITR 504 and Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. De Beers India (P.) Ltd. [2012] 346 ITR 467/208 Taxman 406/21 taxmann.com 214 in favour of the assessee, and there is no contrary decision by Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court or by Hon'ble Supreme Court. In De Beers India (P.) Ltd. case (supra), their Lordships posed the question, as to "wha…

Ciena Communications India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 6(1), New Delhi

In the result grounds raised by assessee for the year under consideration stands allowed

ITA 3563/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Sept 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri R.K.Panda & Smt. Beena A Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, Sr. D.R
Section 234DSection 244ASection 250(6)Section 253(1)(a)Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: BENCH “B” NEW DELHI BEFORE SRI R.K.PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA A PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 3561, 3562 and 3563/Del/2018 A.Y. 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 Ciena Communications India Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT, Circle-6(1) C/o Kochhar and Co. New Delhi Law House, Suite/Unit No.1120-1121, 11th Floor, Tower A, DLF Towers, Jasola, Jasola District Centre New Delhi 110 025 PAN: AADCC8462C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Vishal Kalra, Adv. Respondent by: Shri Surender Pal, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing: 14.09.2018 Date of Pronouncement: 27th Sept…

Ciena Communications India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 6(1), New Delhi

In the result grounds raised by assessee for the year under consideration stands allowed

ITA 3562/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Sept 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri R.K.Panda & Smt. Beena A Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, Sr. D.R
Section 234DSection 244ASection 250(6)Section 253(1)(a)Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: BENCH “B” NEW DELHI BEFORE SRI R.K.PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA A PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 3561, 3562 and 3563/Del/2018 A.Y. 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 Ciena Communications India Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT, Circle-6(1) C/o Kochhar and Co. New Delhi Law House, Suite/Unit No.1120-1121, 11th Floor, Tower A, DLF Towers, Jasola, Jasola District Centre New Delhi 110 025 PAN: AADCC8462C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Vishal Kalra, Adv. Respondent by: Shri Surender Pal, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing: 14.09.2018 Date of Pronouncement: 27th Sept…

Ciena Communications India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 6(1), New Delhi

In the result grounds raised by assessee for the year under consideration stands allowed

ITA 3561/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Sept 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri R.K.Panda & Smt. Beena A Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, Sr. D.R
Section 234DSection 244ASection 250(6)Section 253(1)(a)Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: BENCH “B” NEW DELHI BEFORE SRI R.K.PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA A PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 3561, 3562 and 3563/Del/2018 A.Y. 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 Ciena Communications India Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT, Circle-6(1) C/o Kochhar and Co. New Delhi Law House, Suite/Unit No.1120-1121, 11th Floor, Tower A, DLF Towers, Jasola, Jasola District Centre New Delhi 110 025 PAN: AADCC8462C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Vishal Kalra, Adv. Respondent by: Shri Surender Pal, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing: 14.09.2018 Date of Pronouncement: 27th Sept…

Ongc As Representative Assessee of Gulf Piping Company, Wll, Abu Dhabi, Uae, Dehradun vs. DCIT (International Taxation), Dehradun

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1330/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri N.K. Billaiya[Assessment Year: 2011-12] & [Assessment Year: 2011-12] M/S Ongc Ltd [As Representative Assessee Vs. The D.C.I.T Of Gulf Piping Co. Wll, Abu Dhabi, Uae International Taxation C/O Ongc Ltd, Corporate Tax Division Circle - Ii Tel Bhawan, Dehradun Dehradun Pan : Aaaco 1598 A [Appellant] [Respondent]

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, Sr. DR
Section 44BSection 9(1)(i)

…ees for technical services under India-USA DTAA, as no technical knowledge, skill, know how etc. was made available to the assessee. The issue in question is no more res integra in view of the following judgments :- 1. DIT vs. Guy Carpenter & Co. Ltd. (2012) 346 ITR 504 2. CIT vs. De Beers India Minerals (P) Ltd. 346 ITR 467 9. Thus the amount paid by ONGC to the NRC can be brought to tax only under article 7 of the Indo-USA DTAA as business profit, provided the NRC has a Permanent Establishment (PE) in India and the profit in question is attributable to such PE. Admittedly NRC does not have PE in India. Under…

Shell Information Technology International Bv, Mumbai vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax(International Taxation)-4(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2011-12 is partly allowed

ITA 2058/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajendra, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आिकर अपील सं./Ita No. 2058/Mum/2016 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/S Shell Information Technology Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of International Bv, Income Tax (International C/O B S R & Co. Llp, Taxation)-4(2)(1), 1St Floor, Lodha Excelus, Scindia House, Ballard Estate, Apollo Mills Compound, N.M. Road, Mumbai - 400038 N.M. Joshi Marg, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai - 400011 स्थािी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaics9091A (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) राजस्व की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Madhuragrawal (Ar) यनर्ावररती की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Samuel Darse (Cit Dr) सुनर्ाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 27/02/2018 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement: 28/05/2018

For Appellant: Shri MadhurAgrawal (AR)For Respondent: Shri Samuel Darse (CIT DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 2(24)Section 234ASection 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 9(1)(vi)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ ‘एल’, म ुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “L”, BENCH, MUMBAI सर्वश्री राजेन्द्र, लेखा सदस्य, एवुं , राम लाल नेगी न्यायिक सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI RAJENDRA, AM AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI, JM आिकर अपील सं./ITA No. 2058/Mum/2016 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/s Shell Information Technology Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of International BV, Income Tax (International C/o B S R & Co. LLP, Taxation)-4(2)(1), 1st Floor, Lodha Excelus, Scindia House, Ballard Estate, Apollo Mills Compound, N.M. Road, Mumbai - 400038 N.M. Joshi Marg, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai - 400011 स्थािी…

JCIT, (OSD), Cir-2(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Onprocess Technology India Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed and that of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1241/KOL/2016[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 May 2018AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 195Section 40Section 9(1)(i)Section 9(1)(vii)

…2/Coch/2013 dated 27.09.2013 and Foster Wheeler France SA (supra) was clearly untenable and erroneous. 18. On the other hand, reliance placed by the Ld. AR on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi high Court in the case of DIT Vs. Guy Carpenter & Co. Ltd. (2012) 346 ITR 504 (Del) and Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. De Beers India Minerals Pvt. Ltd. (2012) 346 ITR 467 (Kar) appear more appropriate on the facts of the case. We also note that the Coordinate bench of this Tribunal at Kolkata in the case of ADIT Vs. Timken Co. in ITA Nos. 387 & 398/Kol/2010 dated 29.11.2017 considered the said Article…