ICICI Bank Limited v. Dy. CIT

99 ITD 549Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2006#3621 most cited

What is ICICI Bank Limited v. Dy. CIT authority for?

Fees for technical services are taxable only when the recipient can independently provide the same services without the service provider's assistance, after the services are rendered. Managerial or consultancy services that do not involve or transmit technology are not taxable as fees for technical services.

33

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2023.

Also referred to as

ICICI Bank Limited v. Dy. CIT · 99 ITD 549 · 20 SOT 453 · fees for technical services · make available clause · section 9(1)(vi) · section 9(1)(vii) · managerial services · consultancy services · enduring benefit · use of equipment · fees for included services

Also reported as

20 SOT 453

Issues it is cited on

fees for included servicesuse of equipmentsection 9(l)(vi)make available clausesection 90(1)section 9(l)section 90(2)enduring benefitsection 115asection 9(1)(vii)section 9(1)(vi)fees for technical services

Judgments citing ICICI Bank Limited v. Dy. CIT

DCIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Sutherland Gloabal Services Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

ITA 2051/CHNY/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Feb 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Abraham P.George & Shri George Mathan

For Appellant: Shri. V. Lakshmikumaran, AdvFor Respondent: Shri. Sailendra Mamidi, CIT
Section 115JSection 195Section 201

…endered by SGS USA for market development In support of the above contentions, assessee placed reliance on 7. the above following Tribunal decisions :- Bharath Petroleum Corporation Ltd. vs. JDIT. (2007) 14 SOT 307, Mumbai Mckinsey & Co Inc vs. ADIT (2006) 99 ITD 549,Mumbai National Organic Chemical Industries vs DCIT, (2006) 5 SOT 317, Mumbai DCIT vs. Boston Consulting Group Pte Ltd. (2005) 94 ITD 31, Mumbai NQA Quality Systems…

Sutherland Global Services Private Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

ITA 2002/CHNY/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Feb 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Abraham P.George & Shri George Mathan

For Appellant: Shri. V. Lakshmikumaran, AdvFor Respondent: Shri. Sailendra Mamidi, CIT
Section 115JSection 195Section 201

…endered by SGS USA for market development In support of the above contentions, assessee placed reliance on 7. the above following Tribunal decisions :- Bharath Petroleum Corporation Ltd. vs. JDIT. (2007) 14 SOT 307, Mumbai Mckinsey & Co Inc vs. ADIT (2006) 99 ITD 549,Mumbai National Organic Chemical Industries vs DCIT, (2006) 5 SOT 317, Mumbai DCIT vs. Boston Consulting Group Pte Ltd. (2005) 94 ITD 31, Mumbai NQA Quality Systems…

Biocon Research Limited, Bangalore vs. CIT(A) I, Bangalore

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

ITA 1329/BANG/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Dec 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.N.Parbat, CIT(DR)
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 194CSection 40

…onsideration before various appellate authorities, which have concurred with the above position. In this regard, the reliance can be made on the following decisions, which are squarely applicable to the case on hand:— ♦ Mckinsey & Co. Inc. v. Asst. DIT [2006] 99 ITD 549 (Mum.) In the above case as well, Mckinsey and Co Inc was engaged in providing strategic consultancy services, the Hon'ble Tribunal has held as under:— "Merely because the assessee have rendered certain consultancy services to the McKinsey India does not by itself can be reason enough to conclude that the consideration (or such consultancy service…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Biocon Research Ltd., Bangalore

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

ITA 1251/BANG/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Dec 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.N.Parbat, CIT(DR)
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 194CSection 40

…onsideration before various appellate authorities, which have concurred with the above position. In this regard, the reliance can be made on the following decisions, which are squarely applicable to the case on hand:— ♦ Mckinsey & Co. Inc. v. Asst. DIT [2006] 99 ITD 549 (Mum.) In the above case as well, Mckinsey and Co Inc was engaged in providing strategic consultancy services, the Hon'ble Tribunal has held as under:— "Merely because the assessee have rendered certain consultancy services to the McKinsey India does not by itself can be reason enough to conclude that the consideration (or such consultancy service…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Biocon Research Ltd., Bangalore

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

ITA 1250/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Dec 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.N.Parbat, CIT(DR)
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 194CSection 40

…onsideration before various appellate authorities, which have concurred with the above position. In this regard, the reliance can be made on the following decisions, which are squarely applicable to the case on hand:— ♦ Mckinsey & Co. Inc. v. Asst. DIT [2006] 99 ITD 549 (Mum.) In the above case as well, Mckinsey and Co Inc was engaged in providing strategic consultancy services, the Hon'ble Tribunal has held as under:— "Merely because the assessee have rendered certain consultancy services to the McKinsey India does not by itself can be reason enough to conclude that the consideration (or such consultancy service…

Biocon Research Limited, Bangalore vs. CIT(A) I, Bangalore

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

ITA 1229/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Dec 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.N.Parbat, CIT(DR)
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 194CSection 40

…onsideration before various appellate authorities, which have concurred with the above position. In this regard, the reliance can be made on the following decisions, which are squarely applicable to the case on hand:— ♦ Mckinsey & Co. Inc. v. Asst. DIT [2006] 99 ITD 549 (Mum.) In the above case as well, Mckinsey and Co Inc was engaged in providing strategic consultancy services, the Hon'ble Tribunal has held as under:— "Merely because the assessee have rendered certain consultancy services to the McKinsey India does not by itself can be reason enough to conclude that the consideration (or such consultancy service…

Red Chillies Entertainment P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT (TDS) 3(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed in terms of our directions contained in the orders passed in the aforesaid appeals

ITA 93/MUM/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia () & Shri Ashwani Taneja ()

Section 192Section 194Section 194JSection 201

…know-how or process needs to be 'made available'. Generally speaking, technology would be considered 'made available' when the person acquiring the service is enabled to apply the technology as was also held in: • Mc. Kinsey & Co., Inc. (Philippines) v. ADIT 99 ITD 549 (Mumbai) • ICICI Bank Ltd. v. DIT 20 SOT 453 (Mumbai) • Anapharm Inc., In re 305 ITR 394 (AAR) As the payment made to 'VHQ' is not taxable in India, assessee cannot be held to be an Assessee in default. 25. Per contra, Ld. DR vehemently supported the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and AO and submitted that since payment has been made for the work used i…

Red Chillies Entertainment P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT (TDS) 3(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed in terms of our directions contained in the orders passed in the aforesaid appeals

ITA 92/MUM/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia () & Shri Ashwani Taneja ()

Section 192Section 194Section 194JSection 201

…know-how or process needs to be 'made available'. Generally speaking, technology would be considered 'made available' when the person acquiring the service is enabled to apply the technology as was also held in: • Mc. Kinsey & Co., Inc. (Philippines) v. ADIT 99 ITD 549 (Mumbai) • ICICI Bank Ltd. v. DIT 20 SOT 453 (Mumbai) • Anapharm Inc., In re 305 ITR 394 (AAR) As the payment made to 'VHQ' is not taxable in India, assessee cannot be held to be an Assessee in default. 25. Per contra, Ld. DR vehemently supported the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and AO and submitted that since payment has been made for the work used i…

Red Chillies Entertaiment P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT (TDS) 3(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed in terms of our directions contained in the orders passed in the aforesaid appeals

ITA 6655/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia () & Shri Ashwani Taneja ()

Section 192Section 194Section 194JSection 201

…know-how or process needs to be 'made available'. Generally speaking, technology would be considered 'made available' when the person acquiring the service is enabled to apply the technology as was also held in: • Mc. Kinsey & Co., Inc. (Philippines) v. ADIT 99 ITD 549 (Mumbai) • ICICI Bank Ltd. v. DIT 20 SOT 453 (Mumbai) • Anapharm Inc., In re 305 ITR 394 (AAR) As the payment made to 'VHQ' is not taxable in India, assessee cannot be held to be an Assessee in default. 25. Per contra, Ld. DR vehemently supported the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and AO and submitted that since payment has been made for the work used i…

ACIT Cir 6(1), Mumbai vs. Aarti Drugs Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5557/MUM/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm Acit – 6(1), Mumbai Vs. M/S. Aarti Drugs Limited Plot No.109, D 3Rd Floor, Mahendra Industrial Estate, Sion (E), Mumbai – 400 022 Pan/Gir No. Aaaca4410D Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 32Section 40

…kill, know how or processes to the Appellant then the same are not 'fees for technical services'.  CIT vs. De Beers India Minerals Pvt Ltd 346 ITR 467 (Kar HC)  DIT vs. Guy Carpenter & Co Ltd 346 ITR 504 (Del HC)  Mckinsey & Co., Inc. (Phillippines) & Ors. 99 ITD 549 (Mum ITAT)  Raymond Limited Vs. Deputy CIT 80 TT J 120 (Mum ITAT)  National Organic Chemical Industries Ltd. 96 TT J 765 (Mum ITAT)  Intertek Testing Services India (P) Ltd., In Re 307 ITR 448 (AAR) 8 M/s. Aarti Drugs Ltd., 4.8 I agree with the appellant that the payments made by the appellant are for such services which do not make available…

Mckinsey Knowledge Centre Belgium Inc, Mumbai vs. DDIT (It) 4(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 5407/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am Mckinsey, Incorporated Vs. Deputy Director Of Income-Tax C/O Srbc & Associates Llp (International Taxation)- 4(1) 14Th Floor, The Ruby, Scindia House, Senapati Bapat Marg, Ballard Estate Dadar(W) Mumbai – 400 038. Mumbai – 400 028. Pan: Aaacm7221N Appellant .. Respondent Mckinsey Knowledge Center Belgium,Inc. Vs. Deputy Director Of Income-Tax C/O Srbc & Associates Llp (International Taxation)- 4(1) 14Th Floor, The Ruby, Scindia House, Senapati Bapat Marg, Ballard Estate Dadar(W) Mumbai – 400 038. Mumbai – 400 028. Pan: Aadcm3489P

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 9

…services rendered by the assessee are not taxable in India under Article 12 and also it is an admitted fact that the assessee do not have any PE in India and therefore the same are not taxable under the treaty.” (ii)Mckinsey & Co. Inc. (Philippines) Vs. ADIT 99 ITD 549 (ITAT Mumbai) for Assessment Year 2001-02: “For the reasons set out above, I am of the considered view that the CIT (A) indeed erred in holding that the monies received by the appellant-companies from McKinsey India constitute ‘fees for included services’ within the meanings of Article 12 (4) of the India-US treaty, and accordingly liable to be t…

Mckinsey Incorporated, Mumbai vs. DDIT (It) 4(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 5406/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am Mckinsey, Incorporated Vs. Deputy Director Of Income-Tax C/O Srbc & Associates Llp (International Taxation)- 4(1) 14Th Floor, The Ruby, Scindia House, Senapati Bapat Marg, Ballard Estate Dadar(W) Mumbai – 400 038. Mumbai – 400 028. Pan: Aaacm7221N Appellant .. Respondent Mckinsey Knowledge Center Belgium,Inc. Vs. Deputy Director Of Income-Tax C/O Srbc & Associates Llp (International Taxation)- 4(1) 14Th Floor, The Ruby, Scindia House, Senapati Bapat Marg, Ballard Estate Dadar(W) Mumbai – 400 038. Mumbai – 400 028. Pan: Aadcm3489P

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 9

…services rendered by the assessee are not taxable in India under Article 12 and also it is an admitted fact that the assessee do not have any PE in India and therefore the same are not taxable under the treaty.” (ii)Mckinsey & Co. Inc. (Philippines) Vs. ADIT 99 ITD 549 (ITAT Mumbai) for Assessment Year 2001-02: “For the reasons set out above, I am of the considered view that the CIT (A) indeed erred in holding that the monies received by the appellant-companies from McKinsey India constitute ‘fees for included services’ within the meanings of Article 12 (4) of the India-US treaty, and accordingly liable to be t…

Gujarat Pipavav Port Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO TDS 3, Mumbai

ITA 7878/MUM/2010[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Feb 2016AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri Sunil Moti LalaFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Kumar-Sr.A.R
Section 201Section 201rSection 254(1)Section 6Section 9

…आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, ‘एल एल ’ खंडपीठ खंडपीठ मुंबई मुंबई आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण एल एल खंडपीठ खंडपीठ मुंबई मुंबई INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,MUMBAI “L” BENCH सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" राजे"", लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं एवं राम राम लाल लाल नेगी नेगी, "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं एवं राम राम लाल लाल नेगी नेगी "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य Before S/Sh. Rajendra,Accountant Member & Ram Lal Negi,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं/.ITA No.7878/Mum/2010,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Assessment Year-2008-09 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Gujar…