Holmes v. Pheonix Insurance Co.

103 ITR 189High Court1899#4444 most cited

What is Holmes v. Pheonix Insurance Co. authority for?

Mere stocking of a drug does not constitute an offence under the relevant section unless it is for the purpose of sale, as indicated by the grammatical structure of the section's wording.

26

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Holmes v. Pheonix Insurance Co. · 103 ITR 189 · stocking for sale · offence under drugs act · statutory interpretation · grammatical construction

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Holmes v. Pheonix Insurance Co.

M/S BELGACOM INTERNATIONAL CARRIER SERVICES SA ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1) INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2884/BANG/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri. B.R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(It)A No. 2884/Bang/2017 Assessment Year : 2008-09 M/S. Belgacom The Deputy International Carrier Commissioner Of Services Sa, Income Tax, Rue Lebeau 4, Circle -1(1), 1000 Brussels, International Taxation, Vs. Belgium. Bangalore. Appellant Respondent : Shri V. Sridharan, Senior Assessee By Advocate : Shri Pradeep Kumar, Cit-Dr & Revenue By Smt. Vandana Sagar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 16-03-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 26-04-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Non Resident Assessee Against Order Dated 30.10.2017 Passed By Dcit (It), Circle -1(1), Bangalore On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “Being Aggrieved By The Order Of The Learned Dcit, Circle - 1(1), International Taxation, Bengaluru ('A0'), Read With The Order Of The Learned Dispute Resolution Panel ('Drp*), Bengaluru, The Assessee Begs To Prefer The Present Appeal On The Following Grounds: 1. The Learned Ao Erred In Exercising, Jurisdiction U/S 147 Of The Act In The Case Of The Appellant. 2. The Lower Authorities Erred In Holding That A Sum Of Rs. 6,87,13,119/- Received By The Appellant From Its Customer In India Is In The Nature Of 'Royalty' Within The Meaning Of Section 9(1)(Vi) Of The It Act & Accordingly Taxable In India Under The It Act.

For Respondent: Shri V. Sridharan, Senior
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 9(1)(v)Section 9(1)(vi)Section 9(1)(vii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(IT)A No. 2884/Bang/2017 Assessment Year : 2008-09 M/s. Belgacom The Deputy International Carrier Commissioner of Services SA, Income Tax, Rue Lebeau 4, Circle -1(1), 1000 Brussels, International Taxation, Vs. Belgium. Bangalore. APPELLANT RESPONDENT : Shri V. Sridharan, Senior Assessee by Advocate : Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT-DR & Revenue by Smt. Vandana Sagar, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 16-03-2022 Date of Pronouncement : 26-04-2022 ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER P…

AMADEUS IT GROUP SA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 1626/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Oct 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 4906/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Amadeus It Group Sa, Vs Asstt. Dit, C/O-Vaish Associates, Advocate, Circle-1(1), 10, Hailey Road, Dakshineshwar International Taxation, Building, Flat No. 5-7, New Delhi New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aafca9629P Ita No. 5150/Del/2011 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 60/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Amadeus It Group Sa, Vs Addl. Dit, C/O-Vaish Associates, Advocate, Range-1, 10, Hailey Road, Dakshineshwar International Taxation, Building, Flat No. 5-7, New Delhi New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aafca9629P Ita No. 1824/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Amadeus It Group Sa, Vs Ddit, C/O-Vaish Associates, Advocate, Circle-1, 1St Floor, Mohan Dev Building, International Taxation, 13, Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aafca9629P

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Satpal Gulati, CIT DR
Section 143(3)

…for sale, sells, stocks or exhibits for sale or distributes" a drug without a license is liable for punishment. In holding that mere stocking shall not amount to an offence under the section, the Supreme Court pointed out the presence of comma 98 F 240 (1899) 103 ITR 189 208 ITR 291 supra note 46 231 ITR 573 AIR 1996 SC 569 AIR 1979 SC 564 AIR 1929 Privy Council 69 AIR 1952 SC 369 AIR 1929 PC 38 AIR 1979 SC 564 after "manufactures for sale" and "sells" and the absence of any comma after "stocks" was indicative of the fact "stocks" was to be read along with "for sale" and not in a manner so as to be divorced from…

AMADEUS IT GROUP SA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 1204/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Oct 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 4906/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Amadeus It Group Sa, Vs Asstt. Dit, C/O-Vaish Associates, Advocate, Circle-1(1), 10, Hailey Road, Dakshineshwar International Taxation, Building, Flat No. 5-7, New Delhi New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aafca9629P Ita No. 5150/Del/2011 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 60/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Amadeus It Group Sa, Vs Addl. Dit, C/O-Vaish Associates, Advocate, Range-1, 10, Hailey Road, Dakshineshwar International Taxation, Building, Flat No. 5-7, New Delhi New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aafca9629P Ita No. 1824/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Amadeus It Group Sa, Vs Ddit, C/O-Vaish Associates, Advocate, Circle-1, 1St Floor, Mohan Dev Building, International Taxation, 13, Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aafca9629P

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Satpal Gulati, CIT DR
Section 143(3)

…for sale, sells, stocks or exhibits for sale or distributes" a drug without a license is liable for punishment. In holding that mere stocking shall not amount to an offence under the section, the Supreme Court pointed out the presence of comma 98 F 240 (1899) 103 ITR 189 208 ITR 291 supra note 46 231 ITR 573 AIR 1996 SC 569 AIR 1979 SC 564 AIR 1929 Privy Council 69 AIR 1952 SC 369 AIR 1929 PC 38 AIR 1979 SC 564 after "manufactures for sale" and "sells" and the absence of any comma after "stocks" was indicative of the fact "stocks" was to be read along with "for sale" and not in a manner so as to be divorced from…

AMADEUS IT GROUP SA.,NEW DELHI vs. DDIT, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 1824/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Oct 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 4906/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Amadeus It Group Sa, Vs Asstt. Dit, C/O-Vaish Associates, Advocate, Circle-1(1), 10, Hailey Road, Dakshineshwar International Taxation, Building, Flat No. 5-7, New Delhi New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aafca9629P Ita No. 5150/Del/2011 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 60/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Amadeus It Group Sa, Vs Addl. Dit, C/O-Vaish Associates, Advocate, Range-1, 10, Hailey Road, Dakshineshwar International Taxation, Building, Flat No. 5-7, New Delhi New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aafca9629P Ita No. 1824/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Amadeus It Group Sa, Vs Ddit, C/O-Vaish Associates, Advocate, Circle-1, 1St Floor, Mohan Dev Building, International Taxation, 13, Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aafca9629P

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Satpal Gulati, CIT DR
Section 143(3)

…for sale, sells, stocks or exhibits for sale or distributes" a drug without a license is liable for punishment. In holding that mere stocking shall not amount to an offence under the section, the Supreme Court pointed out the presence of comma 98 F 240 (1899) 103 ITR 189 208 ITR 291 supra note 46 231 ITR 573 AIR 1996 SC 569 AIR 1979 SC 564 AIR 1929 Privy Council 69 AIR 1952 SC 369 AIR 1929 PC 38 AIR 1979 SC 564 after "manufactures for sale" and "sells" and the absence of any comma after "stocks" was indicative of the fact "stocks" was to be read along with "for sale" and not in a manner so as to be divorced from…

Showing 120 of 26 · Page 1 of 2

Holmes v. Pheonix Insurance Co. (103 ITR 189) — Cited in 26 Judgments | BharatTax