In\nSedco Forex International Drilling Inc. v. CIT

279 ITR 310Supreme Court of India2005#909 most cited
116

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 14ASection 143(3)Section 143(2)Section 142(1)Section 56(2)(viii)Section 10(37)Section 143(1)Section 145B(1)

Issues it is cited on

section 2(viii)section 56(viii)section 45(5)(c)section 155(16)section 23(1a)section 104section 45(5)(b)section 145b(1)section 194lakeyman insurancesection 160section 23(2)

Judgments citing In\nSedco Forex International Drilling Inc. v. CIT

Tata Social Welfare Trust, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT 17, Mumbai

ITA 7237/MUM/2019[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Mar 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Us, Are As Follows: Assessment Year: 2019-20

Section 11Section 115TSection 12A

…as accepted the validity and binding nature of the beneficent or benevolent circulars, and recognized the taxpayer’s right to enforce these circulars, in favour of the assessee, even in courts. In the case of Sedco Forex International Drill Inc Vs CIT [(2005) 279 ITR 310 (SC)], following CIT Vs Patel Brothers & Co Ltd [(1995) 215 ITR 165 (SC)], Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed that The CBDT circular conveying “departmental understanding of the effect of the 1999 amendment even if it were assumed not to bind the respondents under section 119 of the Act, nevertheless affords a reasonable construction of it, and t…

M/S. Device Driven (India) Pvt. Ltd vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax

ITA/257/2014HC Kerala13 Oct 2020

Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI

Section 10ASection 10BSection 143(1)Section 195Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

…the Karnataka High Court held that the effect of the Supreme Court decision in Ishikawajima had not been obliterated. Insofar as how the explanation has to be construed, reliance has been placed on Sedco Forex International Drill Inc. v. CIT [(2015) 279 ITR 310 (SC)]. 5. Section 195 casts a liability on the person making a payment to a non-resident to deduct tax at source I.T.A.No.257 of 2014 - 6 - only when it is a sum chargeable under the provisions of the Act, as has been held in GE India Technology Centre (P) Ltd. v. CIT [(2010) 10 SCC 29 = (2010) 327 ITR 456 (SC)]. A non-resident is not taxab…

Bimal Kumar Sikaria, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle - 40, Kolkata

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

ITA 346/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Bimal Kumar Sikaria Vs. Acit, Circle-40, Kolkata 159, Ramdular Sarkar Street, Kolkata – 700006. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aurps0380C (अपीलाथ" /Assessee) (""यथ" / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT(Sr. DR)
Section 131Section 133A(1)Section 143(3)Section 40Section 40A(3)

…fies the existing provision of section 194C of the Act. Hence, it would be applicable retrospectively. We are concerned with the assessment year 1994-95. In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court in the case of Sedco Forex International Drill Inc. v. CIT [2005] 279 ITR 310, considering the scope of the Explanation, held that there is no principle of interpretation which would justify reading the Explanation as operating retrospectively, when the Explanation comes into force with effect from a future date. In this case, the Explanation introduced is with effect from July 1, 1995. Hence it will be applicable only for…

Arya Roadways Co.Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 3(3), Kolkata [New ITO, Ward - 12(1), Kolkata]

Appeal is allowed

ITA 1454/KOL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Dec 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganeshassessment Year :2010-11 Arya Roadways Co Pvt V/S. Ito Ward-3(3), [New Ltd., Tivoli Court, Block-B, Ito Ward-12(1)] Aayakar Bhavana, 7Th Flat-93, 1C, Ballygunge Circular Road, Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Kolkata-700 019 Square, Kolkata-69 [Pan No.Aaeca 9139 M] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Brijesh Kr. Singh, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri A.K. Singh, Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 06-12-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 26-12-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2010-11 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-15, Kolkata’S Order Dated 21.02.2017 Passed In Case No.385/Cit(A)-15/15-16/3(3)/R&T/Kol Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Heard Both The Sides. 2. The Assessee Has Raised Two Substantive Grounds In The Instant Appeal. It Firstly Seeks To Reverse Both The Lower Authorities’ Action Disallowing / Adding Its Freight Charges Of ₹11,68,46,218/- As Well As Loading / Unloading Charges Of ₹10,87,385/- Paid To Various Parties On

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 192Section 201(1)Section 40

…fies the existing provision of section 194C of the Act. Hence, it would be applicable retrospectively. We are concerned with the assessment year 1994-95. In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court in the case of Sedco Forex International Drill Inc. v. CIT [2005] 279 ITR 310, considering the scope of the Explanation, held that there is no principle of interpretation which would justify reading the Explanation as operating retrospectively, when the Explanation comes into force with effect from a future date. In this case, the Explanation introduced is with effect from July 1, 1995. Hence it will be applicable only for…

Surendra Kumar Mittal, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 45(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the appellant is allowed

ITA 563/KOL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Jul 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.563/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Surendra Kumar Mittal Vs. Ito, Ward – 45(2), Kolkata

For Appellant: NONEFor Respondent: Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…fies the existing provision of section 194C of the Act. Hence, it would be applicable retrospectively. We are concerned with the assessment year 1994-95. In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court in the case of Sedco Forex International Drill Inc. v. CIT [2005] 279 ITR 310, considering the scope of the Explanation, held that there is no principle of interpretation which would justify reading the Explanation as operating retrospectively, when the Explanation comes into force with effect from a future date. In this case, the Explanation introduced is with effect from July 1, 1995. Hence it will be applicable only for…

ITO, WD-40(3), Kolkata vs. M/S Dayal Roadlines, Howrah

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1376/KOL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Jul 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ]

For Appellant: Shri S.Dasgupta, Addl. CIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 194C(1)Section 40

…fies the existing provision of section 194C of the Act. Hence, it would be applicable retrospectively. We are concerned with the assessment year 1994-95. In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court in the case of Sedco Forex International Drill Inc. v. CIT [2005] 279 ITR 310, considering the scope of the Explanation, held that there is no principle of interpretation which would justify reading the Explanation as operating retrospectively, when the Explanation comes into force with effect from a future date. In this case, the Explanation introduced is with effect from July 1, 1995. Hence it will be applicable only for…

ADIT, Dehradun vs. M/S. Hampson Russell Ltd Partnership, Mumbai

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

ITA 4976/DEL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Apr 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kant

Section 115ASection 44BSection 44DSection 9Section 9(1)(vi)

…as only clarificatory in nature and thus its application has to be read into the main provisions w.e.f. the time the main provision came into effect in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sedco Forex International drilling Vs. CIT 279 ITR 310. 26. In our opinion, the amendment brought by the Finance Act, 2011 cannot be made effect from the retrospective effect as that it adversely affects the interest of the assessee. We are in agreement with the findings of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sedco Forex International Drilling Incorporation Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, (supra…

ADIT Intl. Taxation, Dehradun vs. M/S. Hampson Russell Ltd. Partnership., Mumbai

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

ITA 1182/DEL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Apr 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kant

Section 115ASection 44BSection 44DSection 9Section 9(1)(vi)

…as only clarificatory in nature and thus its application has to be read into the main provisions w.e.f. the time the main provision came into effect in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sedco Forex International drilling Vs. CIT 279 ITR 310. 26. In our opinion, the amendment brought by the Finance Act, 2011 cannot be made effect from the retrospective effect as that it adversely affects the interest of the assessee. We are in agreement with the findings of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sedco Forex International Drilling Incorporation Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, (supra…

M/S Hero Honda Motors Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2148/DEL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Feb 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Sh C.M.Garg & Shri Prashant Maharishihero Honda Motors Ltd, Dcit, 34, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, Circle-12(1), Vs. New Delhi New Delhi Pan:Aaacg0812J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. AK Saroha, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 263Section 32Section 37(1)Section 40Section 9

…to section 263 enacted w.e.f. 01.06.2015, he submitted that same is not retrospective in nature. He stated that it cannot validate jurisdiction which was lacking originally. He further relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Sedco Forex 279 ITR 310. He further stated that jurisdiction applied to the order u/s 263, therefore, if that order is passed prior to the amendment it cannot be made applicable. vi. He further submitted that on the merits of the case ld CIT has not given any finding and therefore, he referred para No. 14 of the order of the ld CIT. He therefore submitted that when revi…

Taurian Iron & Steel Co. P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 4(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 5920/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Sept 2016AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri K.B.DesaiFor Respondent: Shri N.K.Chand
Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

…25 I TR 301)(Guj) (xi). CIT Vs. Dharamchand Anand Kumar (128 ITR 219)(MP) (xii). Trilok Chand Jain Vs. Dugi Lal Pindi Lal & Ors (95 ITR 34)(Del). (xiii). CIT Vs. Roshanlal Kathilal (87 ITR 714)(P&H) (xiv). Sedco Forex International Drill Inc and Ors. Vs. CIT (279 ITR 310) Still further, the Ld. A.R in order to support his contention that as the provisions of Sec. 144C had been made available on the statute w.e.f 01.10.2009, thus the same can be made applicable only w.r.t A.Y. 2010- 11 and subsequent assessment years, relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of : Godrej & Boyce Manufactu…

ITO, WD-10(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Dutsan G. Engineers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 317/KOL/2014[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Aug 2016AY 2006-2007

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Years:2006-07 Ito Ward-10(1) M/S Dutsan G. Engineers बनाम Aayakar Bhawan, 3Rd Pvt. Ltd., Metro Point, 26, / V/S. Floor, Room No. 78, N.S.C. Bose Road, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700 040 Kolkta-700 069 [Pan No.Aabcd 7854 R] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 15Section 194Section 194CSection 194ISection 40

…, no substantial ITA No.317/Kol/2014 A.Y. 2006-07 ITO Wd-10(1) Kol. vs. M/s Dustan G Engineers Pvt. Ltd. Page 4 question of law arises for consideration of the Court.—Sedco Forex International Drill Inc. & Ors. vs. CIT & Anr. (2005) 199 CTR (SC) 320 : (2005) 279 ITR 310 (SC) relied on.” As in the present case, the contract was for machine hiring on rent and not for a work contract as specified under section 194-C of the Act. Therefore, the provision of Sec. 194C of the Act was not applicable in the facts of the present case. As regards to the applicability of provision of Sec. 194-I of the Act it was noticed tha…

Godrej & Boyce Mfg Co. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 10(2), Mumbai

The appeals of the AO is dismissed

ITA 8488/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Aug 2016AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Josh (AR)For Respondent: S/Shri A.G. Bhatkar-(CIT-DR) and K.V. Vispute- (DR)
Section 254(1)Section 43(6)

…or the assessee as mentioned herein below: 1. CIT vs. Triveni Engineering & Industries Ltd. and Others (DOD:05.08.2010) (Delhi – HC); 2. CIT vs. Kerala Electric Lamp Workers Ltd. – 261 ITR 721 (Kerla – HC); 3. SEDCO Forex International Drill INC and Others – 279 ITR 310 (SC) ; 4. DCIT vs. Core Health Care Ltd. – 298 ITR 194 (SC); 5. CIT vs. Sree Senha Valli Textiles P. Ltd. – 259 ITR 77 (Mad. – HC); 6. CIT vs. Vatika Township Pvt. Ltd. and others – Civil appeal No.8750 of 2014 decided on September 5, 2014. 20.We have perused the aforesaid decisions and found that the Hon’ble High Courts and Hon’ble Supreme Cou…

ADIT, Dehradun vs. M/S. Fugro Geoteam As, Dehradun

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the cross

ITA 5928/DEL/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2015AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: S/Shri Amit Arora & Suraj Nangia, CAsFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Arora, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 3

…. CIT v. Shelly P. Products 261 ITR 367 (SC) d. Allied Motors v. CIT [1997] 224 ITR 677 (SC) e. Commissioner of Income-tax v. Apar Industries Ltd 323 ITR 411 (Bom.) 4. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sedco Forex International Drilling vs. CIT [2005] 279 ITR 310 (SC) observed: "An Explanation to a statutory provision may fulfil the purpose of clearing up an ambiguity in the main provision or an Explanation can add to and widen the scope of the main section. If it is in its nature clarificatory then the Explanation must be read into the main provision with effect from the time that the main provision cam…

Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

The appeal is partly allowed

ITA 3688/DEL/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Oct 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri Inturi Rama Rao Assessment Year : 2005-06 Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Vs. Assistant Cit, Bses Bhawan, Nehru Place, Circle-3(1), New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aagcs3187H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2005-06 Deputy Cit, Vs. Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Circle 3(1), Bses Bhavan, Nehru Place, New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aagcs3187H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2006-07 Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Vs. Assistant Cit, Bses Bhawan, Nehru Place, Circle-3(1), New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aagcs3187H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2006-07 Deputy Cit, Vs. Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Circle 3(1), Bses Bhavan, Nehru Place, New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aagcs3187H) (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 154

…governed by the normal presumption that is not retrospective: - S.S.Gadgil vs. Lal and Co. (1964) 53 ITR 231 (SC) - K.M.Sharma vs. ITO (2002) 254 ITR 772 (SC) - Gem Granites vs. CIT (2004) 271 ITR 322 (SC) - Sedco Forex International Drill Inc. vs. CIT (2005) 279 ITR 310 (SC). 22.28 The fundamental principle reiterated in the aforesaid decision is lexprospicit non respicit: i.e., laws look forward and not backward. No section can be interpreted retrospectively unless it is mentioned in the section itself. 22.29 Specific reliance in this regard was placed on the decision of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the…

M/S.Virtual Soft Systems Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-I

C.A. No.-007115-007115 - 2005Supreme Court06 Feb 2007
For Respondent: Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-I
Section 260ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68

…ead) by Lrs. and others v. Padmini Chandrasekharan (Dead) by Lrs., 1995 (2) SCC page 630 at 646. 4. CIT v. Patel Brothers & Co. Ltd. & Ors., 215 ITR 165 (SC). 5. Sedco Forex International Drill Inc. & Ors. v. CIT & Anr., 279 ITR 310 page 317. In the present case, it is only in the Notes on Clauses relating to 2002 amendment that it has been stated that the said amendment is clarificatory. There is no such mention of the said amendment being clarificatory, anywhere in the statute itself. Such a statement in the Notes on Clauses cannot possibly bind the Court when even a…

M/S.Virtual Soft Systems Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-I

C.A. No.-007115-007115 - 2005Supreme Court06 Feb 2007
For Respondent: Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-I
Section 260ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68

…ead) by Lrs. and others v. Padmini Chandrasekharan (Dead) by Lrs., 1995 (2) SCC page 630 at 646. 4. CIT v. Patel Brothers & Co. Ltd. & Ors., 215 ITR 165 (SC). 5. Sedco Forex International Drill Inc. & Ors. v. CIT & Anr., 279 ITR 310 page 317. In the present case, it is only in the Notes on Clauses relating to 2002 amendment that it has been stated that the said amendment is clarificatory. There is no such mention of the said amendment being clarificatory, anywhere in the statute itself. Such a statement in the Notes on Clauses cannot possibly bind the Court when even a…