What is GE India Technology Centre Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Tax must be deducted at source from payments made to a non-resident under Section 195 only if such payment is chargeable to tax in India. The Assessing Officer bears the onus to establish that the payments made are indeed chargeable to tax under the Income Tax Act.

How many judgments cite GE India Technology Centre Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT?

663 judgments on BharatTax cite GE India Technology Centre Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (327 ITR 456), spanning 2013 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does GE India Technology Centre Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 195, Section 40(a)(i), Section 40(a)(ia), Section 143(3), Section 115JB, Section 201(1A).

GE India Technology Centre Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (327 ITR 456)

Gujarat Gas Tradiang Co.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Circle-4, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2371/AHD/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Gujarat Gas Trading Co Ltd

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…der under section 195. In our considered view, the assessee, for the detailed reasons set our above, did not have tax withholding liability from these payments. As held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of GE India Technology Centre (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [2010] 327 ITR 456/193 Taxman 234/7 taxmann.com 18, payer is bound to withhold tax from the foreign remittance only if the sum paid is assessable to tax in India. The assessee cannot, therefore, be faulted for not approaching the Assessing Officer under section 195 either. As regards the withdrawal of the CBDT circular holding that the commission payments to non-re…

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)

…existence/accrual of income in the hands of the identified payee is a pre- condition to fasten the liability of tax deduction at source in the hands of the payer. The Hon‘ble Apex Court in the case of M/s GE India Technology Centre P. Ltd. Vs. CIT and another 327 ITR 456 (SC) held that if payment is not assessable to tax there is no question 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.)…

The DCIT, Circle-1(2), Baroda vs. M/S. Astral Pharmaceuticals Industries, Baroda

In the result, appeal, the appeal and cross-objection, both are dismissed

ITA 634/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: The Ao U/S 195(2) Of The Act, Though It Was Obligation Of The Assessee. 3. The Ld. Cit(Appeals) Erred In Law In Allowing The Claim Of The Assessee Without Appreciating The Fact That Assessee Itself Has Deducted Service Tax From The Payments Made To M/S. Urja International, Usa Which Proves That The

Section 143(3)Section 195(2)Section 40

…the commission amounts which were earned by the non-resident for services rendered outside India could not be deemed to be income which had either accrued or arisen in India. 3,3.3. Hon'ble Apex Court, in the case of GE India Technology Cen. (P.) Ltd. [2010] 327 ITR 456(SC) has held that the expression "chargeable under the provisions of the Act in Sec.195(1)" shows that the remittance has to be of trading receipt, the whole or part of which, is liable to tax in India. If tax is not so assessable, there is no question of tax at source being deducted. Similar view has been taken by Hon'ble Madras High Court in a…

The DCIT, Circle-1(2), Baroda vs. M/S. Astral Pharmaceuticals Industries, Baroda

In the result, appeal, the appeal and cross-objection, both are dismissed

ITA 633/AHD/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Sept 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: The Ao U/S 195(2) Of The Act, Though It Was Obligation Of The Assessee. 3. The Ld. Cit(Appeals) Erred In Law In Allowing The Claim Of The Assessee Without Appreciating The Fact That Assessee Itself Has Deducted Service Tax

Section 143(3)Section 195(2)Section 40

…the commission amounts which were earned by the non-resident for services rendered outside India could not be deemed to be income which had either accrued or arisen in India. 3,3.3. Hon'ble Apex Court, in the case of GE India Technology Cen. (P.) Ltd. [2010] 327 ITR 456(SC) has held that the expression "chargeable under the provisions of the Act in Sec.195(1)" shows that the remittance has to be of trading receipt, the whole or part of which, is liable to tax in India. If tax is not so assessable, there is no question of tax at source being deducted. Similar view has been taken by Hon'ble Madras High Court in a…

ACIT, Chennai vs. Prakash Impex, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1288/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Aug 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.1288/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2012-13 The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S. Prakash Impex, Income Tax, Vs. 58E, (N/P), Sidco Industrial Estate, Non Corporate Circle 7(1), Ambattur, Chennai 600 098. 121, M.G. Road, Chennai – 34. [Pan:Aaafp5388G] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Smt. Veni S. Raj, Jcit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri T. Banusekar, C.A. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 02.08.2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.08.2017 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 7, Chennai Dated 14.03.2017 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2012-13. The Only Effective Ground Raised In The Appeal Of The Revenue Is That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Disallowance Of ₹.82,17,946/- Made Under Section 40(A)(I) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] Paid To Non-Resident Agents Outside India For The Services Rendered By Them Outside India.

For Appellant: Smt. Veni S. Raj, JCITFor Respondent: Shri T. Banusekar, C.A

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘‘बी’’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी संजय अरोड़ा, लेखा सद"य एवं "ी धु"वु" आर.एल रे"डी, "या"यक सद"य के सम" Before Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountant Member & Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.1288/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2012-13 The Assistant Commissioner of M/s. Prakash Impex, Income Tax, Vs. 58E, (N/P), SIDCO Industrial Estate, Non Corporate Circle 7(1), Ambattur, Chennai 600 098. 121, M.G. Road, Chennai – 34. [PAN:AAAFP5388G] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant by : Smt. Veni S. Ra…

DCIT, Bhubaneswar vs. M/S. B & A Multiwall Packaging Ltd., Bhubaneswar

Appeal of the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 59/CTK/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack04 Aug 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.45/Ctk/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2008-2009) M/S B&A Multiwall Packaging Vs. Dcit, Circle-1(1), Limited, (Formerly B&A Multiwall Bhubaneswar-751007 Packaging Limited), C/O Mr.. Shyam Sundar Patri, Chartered Accountant, 1185/1186, Tankapani Road, Bhubaneswar- 751018 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcb 2140 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.59/Ctk/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2008-2009) Dcit, Circle-1(1), Vs. M/S B&A Multiwall Packaging Bhubaneswar-751007 Limited, (Formerly B&A Multiwall Packaging Limited), C/O Mr.. Shyam Sundar Patri, Chartered Accountant, 1185/1186, Tankapani Road, Bhubaneswar-751018 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcb 2140 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Partha Mukhopadhyay, Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri A.K.Mohapatra, Citdr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 02/08/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 04/08/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: These Are The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Against The Order Dated 3.11.2014, Passed By The Cit(A)-1, Bhubaneswar For The Assessment Year 2008-2009. 2. For The Sake Of Convenience, We Shall Take Into Consideration The Facts Narrated In Ita No.45/Ctk/2015 In Assessee’S Appeal, For Deciding

For Appellant: Shri Partha Mukhopadhyay, ARFor Respondent: Shri A.K.Mohapatra, CITDR

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195(2)Section 40

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कटक "यायपीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI N.S.SAINI, AM & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.45/CTK/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2008-2009) M/s B&A Multiwall Packaging Vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Limited, (formerly B&A Multiwall Bhubaneswar-751007 Packaging Limited), C/o Mr.. Shyam Sundar Patri, Chartered Accountant, 1185/1186, Tankapani Road, Bhubaneswar- 751018 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AABCB 2140 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. AND आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.59/CTK/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :200…

B & A Multiwall Packaging Limited, Bhubaneswar vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Bhubaneswar

Appeal of the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 45/CTK/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack04 Aug 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.45/Ctk/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2008-2009) M/S B&A Multiwall Packaging Vs. Dcit, Circle-1(1), Limited, (Formerly B&A Multiwall Bhubaneswar-751007 Packaging Limited), C/O Mr.. Shyam Sundar Patri, Chartered Accountant, 1185/1186, Tankapani Road, Bhubaneswar- 751018 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcb 2140 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.59/Ctk/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2008-2009) Dcit, Circle-1(1), Vs. M/S B&A Multiwall Packaging Bhubaneswar-751007 Limited, (Formerly B&A Multiwall Packaging Limited), C/O Mr.. Shyam Sundar Patri, Chartered Accountant, 1185/1186, Tankapani Road, Bhubaneswar-751018 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcb 2140 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Partha Mukhopadhyay, Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri A.K.Mohapatra, Citdr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 02/08/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 04/08/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: These Are The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Against The Order Dated 3.11.2014, Passed By The Cit(A)-1, Bhubaneswar For The Assessment Year 2008-2009. 2. For The Sake Of Convenience, We Shall Take Into Consideration The Facts Narrated In Ita No.45/Ctk/2015 In Assessee’S Appeal, For Deciding

For Appellant: Shri Partha Mukhopadhyay, ARFor Respondent: Shri A.K.Mohapatra, CITDR

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195(2)Section 40

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कटक "यायपीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI N.S.SAINI, AM & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.45/CTK/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2008-2009) M/s B&A Multiwall Packaging Vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Limited, (formerly B&A Multiwall Bhubaneswar-751007 Packaging Limited), C/o Mr.. Shyam Sundar Patri, Chartered Accountant, 1185/1186, Tankapani Road, Bhubaneswar- 751018 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AABCB 2140 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. AND आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.59/CTK/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :200…

DCIT, Circle-1(1), Bhubaneswar vs. M/S. Paradeep Phosphates Limited, Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and that of

ITA 289/CTK/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack04 Aug 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2010-2011

For Appellant: Shri B.K.MohapatraFor Respondent: Shri Kunal Singh, CIT DR

Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195(2)Section 197Section 263Section 40Section 92

…d 28th October, 2013 quashed the Order of JCIT by mentioning that import purchases are outside the purview of withholding tax by relying upon the landmark decision rendered by the Hon'bie Supreme Court in the matter of GE India Technology Centre P. Ltd v CIT (327 ITR 456). Copy of the Order passed by the Hon'ble ITAT is enclosed and marked as Annexure- 4 for your kind reference. On the same issue for AY 2010-11, the AO has adjudicated that withholding tax should have been levied on such imports and has disallowed the same. In this regard, it may be noted that there has not been any change in the law other than n…

DCIT, Cir-4(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Goodricke Group Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 971/KOL/2015[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Aug 2017AY 2007-2008

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 971/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2007-08 Dcit, Circle-4(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Goodricke Group Ltd., Kolkata [Pan: Aabcg1614Q] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sallong Yadav, Addl. CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Rajendram, FCA

Section 143(3)

…for the services rendered outside india do not partake the income payments and accordingly it is not taxable in India. He finally placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of GE Technology Centre Pvt Ltd and Another reported in 327 ITR 456 (SC) and deleted the disallowance of overseas commission in the sum of Rs 1,18,85,513/-. Aggrieved , the revenue is in appeal before us on the following ground:- 3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred on facts as well as in law in holding that TDS is not applicable on the commission paid outside India through for…

Scope International Private Limited, Chennai vs. ITO, Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1106/CHNY/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Aug 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Tripathi, Jt. CITFor Respondent: 31.07.2017

Section 192Section 195Section 197Section 248

…a, or tax in respect of which stands already paid by or on behalf of the payees, so that no tax was in fact deductible u/s. 195. Reference in this context may also be made to the decision by the Apex Court in GE India Technology Centre (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [2010] 327 ITR 456 (SC). Section 248 provides the mechanism for recovery of the tax paid u/s. 195 on other than interest paid. The onus to prove its claims though would be on the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) shall decide qua each of the sums remitted per a speaking order, issuing definite findings of fact. The assessee, needless to add, shall render all assistance and…

ITO (It), Kolkata vs. M/S. Electrosteel Casting Limited., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2249/KOL/2014[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Jul 2017AY 2011-2012

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 2249/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2011-12 I.T.O. (International Taxation), -Vs.- M/S. Electrosteel Casting Ltd. Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aaace 4975 B] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : None For The Respondent : Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, Fca Date Of Hearing : 14.06.2017. Date Of Pronouncement : 07.07.2017 Order

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, FCA

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 201Section 5(2)Section 9(1)(i)

…of tax at source by the deductor. In the instant case, the commission is not chargeable to tax in India by any means. Hence by placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of GE India Technology Centre P Ltd vs CIT reported in (2010) 327 ITR 456 (SC), we hold that the commission paid by the assessee to the non-resident agents is not chargeable to tax in India and hence there is no question of deduction of tax at source on the said payment. 10.2.1. We find that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Toshuku Ltd reported in 125 ITR 525 (SC) held that:- As regards the question as…

DCIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Bimetal Bearings Ltd., Coimbatore

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee as well as Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2357/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Jun 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I T.A. No. 2111/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2011-12 M/S. Bimetal Bearings Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of 18, Race Course Road, Vs. Income Tax, Coimbatore 641 018. Large Taxpayer Unit Ii, [Pan:Aaacb2036Q] Chennai 600 101. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I T.A. No. 2357/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2011-12 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Bimetal Bearings Ltd., Income Tax, Large Taxpayer Unit 2, 18, Race Course Road, Vs. Chennai 600 101. Coimbatore 641 018. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate Department By : Shri A.V. Sreekanth, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 25.04.2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28.06.2017 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As Revenue Are Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 17

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.V. Sreekanth, JCIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(2)

…t case are not falling under either royalty, interest or fee for technical services, therefore they are not chargeable to tax in India. The 9 I.T.A. Nos.2111 & 2357/M/16 decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of G.E. India Technology Centre P Ltd, 327 ITR 456 (SC) (2010) comes to the rescue of the appellant. Furthermore, my Id. predecessor has allowed such claim in his order vide ITA No. 523/06-07/A. III dated 14.7.2010 in the case of another group concern I.P. Rings Ltd for A.Y. 99-2000 for similar payments made to Amalgamations P Ltd. In view of the above discussion, the disallowance u/s 40(a)(i) is…

M/S. Bimetel Bearings Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee as well as Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2111/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Jun 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I T.A. No. 2111/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2011-12 M/S. Bimetal Bearings Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of 18, Race Course Road, Vs. Income Tax, Coimbatore 641 018. Large Taxpayer Unit Ii, [Pan:Aaacb2036Q] Chennai 600 101. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I T.A. No. 2357/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2011-12 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Bimetal Bearings Ltd., Income Tax, Large Taxpayer Unit 2, 18, Race Course Road, Vs. Chennai 600 101. Coimbatore 641 018. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate Department By : Shri A.V. Sreekanth, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 25.04.2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28.06.2017 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As Revenue Are Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 17

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.V. Sreekanth, JCIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(2)

…t case are not falling under either royalty, interest or fee for technical services, therefore they are not chargeable to tax in India. The 9 I.T.A. Nos.2111 & 2357/M/16 decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of G.E. India Technology Centre P Ltd, 327 ITR 456 (SC) (2010) comes to the rescue of the appellant. Furthermore, my Id. predecessor has allowed such claim in his order vide ITA No. 523/06-07/A. III dated 14.7.2010 in the case of another group concern I.P. Rings Ltd for A.Y. 99-2000 for similar payments made to Amalgamations P Ltd. In view of the above discussion, the disallowance u/s 40(a)(i) is…

Lloyd'S Register Quality Assurance Ltd (India Branch Office), Mumbai vs. ADIT 4(1), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 390/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2017AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi-ARFor Respondent: S/Shri Jasbir Chauhan-CIT and Rajguru M.V

Section 254(1)Section 44C

…आयकर अपीलीय आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, मुंबई मुंबई “ एल एल” खंडपीठ खंडपीठ आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई एल एल खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“L”Bench Mumbai सव"ी सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" सव"ी राजे"" राजे"",लेखा राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं सद"य एवं एवं, राम एवं राम राम लाल राम लाल लाल नेगी लाल नेगी नेगी, "याियक नेगी "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य सद"य Before S/Shri Rajendra,Accountant Member and Ram Lal Negi,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./389/Mum/2013, िनधा"रण अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2008-09 वष" आ…

Lloyds Register Quality Assurance Ltd., Mumbai vs. DDIT-Int, Rax.-.4(1), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 389/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2017AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi-ARFor Respondent: S/Shri Jasbir Chauhan-CIT and Rajguru M.V

Section 254(1)Section 44C

…आयकर अपीलीय आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, मुंबई मुंबई “ एल एल” खंडपीठ खंडपीठ आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई एल एल खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“L”Bench Mumbai सव"ी सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" सव"ी राजे"" राजे"",लेखा राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं सद"य एवं एवं, राम एवं राम राम लाल राम लाल लाल नेगी लाल नेगी नेगी, "याियक नेगी "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य सद"य Before S/Shri Rajendra,Accountant Member and Ram Lal Negi,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./389/Mum/2013, िनधा"रण अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2008-09 वष" आ…