GE India Technology Centre Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

Spe India Films Holding Llc, Mumbai vs. D.C.I.T. (International Taxation) - 4(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Nk Pradhan, Am

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “I” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री महावीर स ुंह, न्याययक दस्य एवुं श्री एन. के. प्रिान लेखा दस्य के मक्ष । BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI NK PRADHAN, AM Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 6480/Mum/2017 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2013-14) SPE India Films Holding LLC Dy. Commissioner of C/o. Deloitte Haskins & Sells Income Tax (IT), 4(2)(2), 16th floor, Room No. 1613, LLP, Indiabulls Finance Centre, Tower 3, 27th Floor- Air India Building, Nariman Vs. 32nd Floor, Senapati Bapat Point, Mumbai-400 021 Marg, Elphinstone Road (W), Mumbai-400 0…

ITO 3(3)2, Mumbai vs. Shamrock Pharmachemi P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.1774/Mum/2013 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) बिाम/ Ito 3(3)2, M/S. Shamrock R.No. 602, Pharmachemi Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, 83E,Hansraj Pragi Bldg., V. M.K Road, Opp. Dr. E Moses Road, Mumbai 400020 Worli, Mumbai-400018 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan: Aaacs6290H (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Revenue By: Shri. Ashim Kumar Modi (Cit- Dr), Shri V. Justin & Ms. Chaitna Ajaria Shri. Bharat L. Gandhi Assessee By: सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 01.03.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.05.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar: This Appeal, Filed By Revenue, Being Ita No. 1774/Mum/2013, Is Directed Against Appellate Order Dated 29.10.2012, Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Mumbai (Hereinafter Called ―The Cit(A)‖) In Appeal Number Cit(A)-7/Ito-3(3)(2)/It-166/11-12, For Assessment Year 2009-10, The Appellate Proceedings Had Arisen Before Learned Cit(A) From The Assessment Order Dated 29.12.2011 Passed By Learned Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Called ―The Ao‖) U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ―The Act‖) For Ay 2009-10. I.T.A. No.1774/Mum/2013

…d to tax. 55. Once it is established that these agents are not taxable in India, the provisions of TDS u/s. 195 of the Act shall not be applicable. It is categorically held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of GE India Technology Centre Pvt Ltd v. CIT [327 ITR 456] wherein it is held that only if, the payee is taxable in India, section 195 can be invoked. Thus, in view of the settled position, we submit that the provisions of section 195 and 40 (a) (i) cannot be made applicable in the case of the appellant, 56. The above submissions were also made before the Assessing Officer at the time of assessment proc…

Raskspace Us Inc, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 4(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, these appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

…space are not taxable in India and consequently, no tax required to be deducted u/s 195 on such payment/remittance by the assessee as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of GE India Technology Centre P. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax reported in 327 ITR 456. 8.3 We further note that for AY 2006-07, the Assessing Officer disallowed the payments made by the assessee to Rackspace for hosting charges u/s 40(a)(ia) for the reason of non deduction of tax at source while passing the assessment order u/s 143(3). 8.4 On appeal, the CIT(A) allowed the claim of the assessee vide order dated 29.1.2009 . Conseq…

Rackspace, Us Inc., Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 4(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, these appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

…space are not taxable in India and consequently, no tax required to be deducted u/s 195 on such payment/remittance by the assessee as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of GE India Technology Centre P. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax reported in 327 ITR 456. 8.3 We further note that for AY 2006-07, the Assessing Officer disallowed the payments made by the assessee to Rackspace for hosting charges u/s 40(a)(ia) for the reason of non deduction of tax at source while passing the assessment order u/s 143(3). 8.4 On appeal, the CIT(A) allowed the claim of the assessee vide order dated 29.1.2009 . Conseq…

Rackspace, Us Inc, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 4(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, these appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

…space are not taxable in India and consequently, no tax required to be deducted u/s 195 on such payment/remittance by the assessee as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of GE India Technology Centre P. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax reported in 327 ITR 456. 8.3 We further note that for AY 2006-07, the Assessing Officer disallowed the payments made by the assessee to Rackspace for hosting charges u/s 40(a)(ia) for the reason of non deduction of tax at source while passing the assessment order u/s 143(3). 8.4 On appeal, the CIT(A) allowed the claim of the assessee vide order dated 29.1.2009 . Conseq…

Marvel Drugs P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 6(3), Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ram Lal Negiassessment Year: 2004-05 Assessment Year: 2005-06 Assessment Year: 2006-07

…nder section 195(2) in case of payments to non residents and assessee's failure to do so is to be visited with conseque nces for non deduction at source, the law is now settled by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of GE India Technology Centre Pvt Ltd Vs CIT (327 ITR 456) wherein Their Lordships have categorically held that, " where a person responsible for deduction is fair ly certain, then he can make his own determination as to whether the tax was deductible at source and, if so, what should be the amount thereof ". The plea of the revenue authorities to the effect that where the assessee does not move an appl…

ITO 2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Aaa Technologies P.Ltd, Mumbai

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon'Ble

…ax at source to such nonexistent entity simply does not arise. Even otherwise, there arises no TDS liability, if the payee is non-resident and no income accrued in India and the payments were made outside India. Ref. GE India Technology P. Ltd. v. CIT [(2010) 327 ITR 456 (SC)]. 39. Learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that considering the evidences furnished by the assessee, the remand report of the Assessing Officer and the submissions of the assessee the Ld.CIT(A) accepted the contentions of the assessee that the assessee has not rendered any services to overseas parties. The assessee has shown in the Bo…

ITO 2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Aaa Technologies P.Ltd, Mumbai

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon'Ble

…ax at source to such nonexistent entity simply does not arise. Even otherwise, there arises no TDS liability, if the payee is non-resident and no income accrued in India and the payments were made outside India. Ref. GE India Technology P. Ltd. v. CIT [(2010) 327 ITR 456 (SC)]. 39. Learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that considering the evidences furnished by the assessee, the remand report of the Assessing Officer and the submissions of the assessee the Ld.CIT(A) accepted the contentions of the assessee that the assessee has not rendered any services to overseas parties. The assessee has shown in the Bo…

Asst CIT Cir 1, Kalyan vs. Monarch Catalyst P.Ltd, Thane

Bench: Hon’Ble Sh. G. S. Pannu, V.P & Hon’Ble Sh. Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 4759/Mum/2015 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) In The Matter Of:

…the act of non deduction of TDS by the assessee is improper. 4. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that, the CIT(A) has relied upon the order of the Apex Court in the case of GE India Tech vs. CIT, 327 ITR 456 (SC), where the Apex Court has restored the matter back to the file of the High Court. Therefore the issue has not attained its finality. 5. The order of the CIT(A) may be vacated and that of the Assessing Officer may be restored. 6. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or delete any ground of appeal. 4 I.T.A. No. 4759/Mum/2015 M/s…