India Vs. Azadi Bachao Andolan 263 ITR 706 (SC); and Vodafone International Holdings B.V v. Union of India

341 ITR 1Supreme Court of India2012#264 most cited

What is India Vs. Azadi Bachao Andolan 263 ITR 706 (SC); and Vodafone International Holdings B.V v. Union of India authority for?

Legitimate tax planning is permissible, allowing taxpayers to arrange their affairs to minimize tax liabilities while respecting the "look at test" for transaction genuineness and the separate entity principle in corporate taxation. The source of funds for treaty-beneficial structures does not automatically invalidate the transaction.

295

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Vodafone International Holdings v. UOI · India Vs. Azadi Bachao Andolan · 341 ITR 1 SC · tax planning permissible · look at test · DTAA benefits · Mauritius treaty · TRC validity · separate entity principle · corporate taxation · Section 90

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 144C(13)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 234CSection 151

Issues it is cited on

treaty benefitsazadi bachao andolantrctax treatypermanent establishmentsection 90short term capital gainnon-residentliable to taxfair market valuesection 115jfinal assessment order

Judgments citing India Vs. Azadi Bachao Andolan 263 ITR 706 (SC); and Vodafone International Holdings B.V v. Union of India

DCIT (It) 4(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Vodafone International Holding B.V., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3244/MUM/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Oct 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Ramlal Negi (Jm)

Section 139Section 154Section 195Section 200ASection 201

…with interest, the rate of which was to be decided by the Supreme Court. The said deposit was withdrawn by the Department on 12.01.2011. 3 M/s. Vodafone International Holding B.V. 3. The Hon'ble Supreme Court vide its final order dated 20.01.2012 reported in 341 ITR 1, while allowing the appeal filed by the assessee, upheld the contention of the assessee that it could not have been held to be an assessee in default under section 201 of the Act. The Supreme Court further directed the Department to refund the deposit of Rs. 2,500 crores made by the assessee earlier along with interest at the rate of 4 percent per…

Usha Sharma, New Delhi vs. ITO (International Taxation), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal and stay application of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 6564/DEL/2016[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2017AY 2015-16

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 194Section 195Section 195(1)Section 201Section 201(1)

…order. In fact, as elaborated earlier in this order, the scheme of the act in introducing such provision, is inferable from the order of Hon'ble Supreme Court, which held in the case of in the case of M/s Vodafone International Holdings BV vs. Union of India, 341 ITR 1, order dated 20.01.2012 (Para 89, per S H Kapadia, J) that – "Section 195(1) casts a duty upon the payer of any income specified therein to a. non-resident to deduct therefrom the TAS unless such payer is himself liable to pay income-tax thereon as an agent of the payee. Section 201 says that if such person fails to so deduct TAS he shall be deemed…

Lal Chand Meena, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward 7-3, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 515/JPR/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Jun 2017AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri Rajendra Singh (Addl.CIT)
Section 148Section 45(3)Section 50CSection 69C

…act which is otherwise valid in law can be treated non est merely on the basis of some underlined motive supposedly resulting in some economic detriment or prejudice to the national interest. Again the SC in case of Vodafone International Holdings BV Vs. UOI 341 ITR 1 has held that the legal fiction cannot be expanded by interpretation, particularly if such interpretation transforms concept of chargeability. It is the task of the court to ascertain the legal nature of the transaction and by doing so it has to look at the entire transaction as whole and not adopt a dissecting approach. The burden is on the revenu…

Sailent Business Solutions Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, reversing the order of the Ld

ITA 6297/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 May 2017AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri PC Yadav, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri N K Bansal
Section 143Section 143(3)

…Sailent business solutions Limited V DCIT Circle 7(1) New Delhi INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G”: NEW DELHI BEFORE, SHRI H. S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 6297/ Del/2013 (Assessment Year: 2008-09) Salient business solutions Ltd The Deputy Commissioner of Thapar house Income Tax 124, Jan path, New Delhi – 1 Circle – 7 (1) PAN AAJC3356B New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri PC Yadav, Advocate Revenue by: Sri N K Bansal Senior Departmental Representative 11th May 2017 Date of Hearing Date of pronouncement 19/05/2017 O R D E R PER PRASH…

M/S Stylish Construction Pvt. Ltd vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2512/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 May 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishistylish Construction Pvt. Ltd, Dcit, 1027, Top Floor, Ward No. 8, Circle-9(1), Vs. Mehra Chowk, Mehrauli New Delhi Pan: Aaics4664H (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Sh. NK Bansal, Sr DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 73

…Co. Ltd. (supra) to contend that transaction itself should be ignored as being a colourable device to avoid tax. Counsel drew our attention to some of the observations made in a recent decision in the case of Vodafone International Holdings B.V. v. UOI [2012] 341 ITR 1/ 204 Taxman 408 /71 taxmann.com 202 (SC) reported in wherein the ratio of the decision in the case of McDowell & Co. Ltd. (supra) came up for consideration in view of the later decision of the Apex Court in the case of UOI v. Azadi Bachao Andolan [2003] 263 ITR 706/ 132 Taxman 373. 11. On the other hand, learned counsel Shri Bandish Soparkar for th…

M/S.Padmini Products Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for all the assessment years are dismissed

ITA 1531/BANG/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Apr 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri S. Jayaramanassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Biju, Jt. CIT(DR)(ITAT-3)For Respondent: Shri M. Gandhi, CA
Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(VA)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 47

…partners in a partnership firm which is joint and several in contrast to the rights and liabilities of the shareholders in a company. He has also relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Vodafone International holdings reported in 341 ITR 1 (SC) to bring out distinction between the holding company and wholly owned subsidiary in which the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that the legal relationship between the holding company and wholly owned subsidiary is that they are two legally distinct ITA Nos.1530 & 1531/Bang/2016 Page 8 of 11 persons and holding company does not own the assets o…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore vs. M/S.Padmini Products Pvt Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for all the assessment years are dismissed

ITA 1530/BANG/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Apr 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri S. Jayaramanassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Biju, Jt. CIT(DR)(ITAT-3)For Respondent: Shri M. Gandhi, CA
Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(VA)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 47

…partners in a partnership firm which is joint and several in contrast to the rights and liabilities of the shareholders in a company. He has also relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Vodafone International holdings reported in 341 ITR 1 (SC) to bring out distinction between the holding company and wholly owned subsidiary in which the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that the legal relationship between the holding company and wholly owned subsidiary is that they are two legally distinct ITA Nos.1530 & 1531/Bang/2016 Page 8 of 11 persons and holding company does not own the assets o…

M/S. Perfetti Van Melle India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Gurgaon

In the result, this appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 789/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Apr 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Smt Suchitra Kamble

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 43(1)Section 80Section 80ISection 92C

…and genuine and not a sham or makebelieve. ” Finally the Hon’ble Supreme Court, after analyzing all relevant judgments on “tax planning” and “tax evasion” came to the following conclusion in case of Vodafone International Holdings B.V. v. Union of India &Anr. 341 ITR 1:- “117. Revenue cannot tax a subject without a statute to support and in the course we also acknowledge that every tax payer is entitled to arrange his affairs so that his taxes shall be as low as possible and that he is not bound to choose that pattern which will replenish the treasury.Revenue’s stand that the ratio laid down in McDowell is contr…

ITO, Alwar vs. Kundan Lal Badshah, Alwar

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is disposed off with above directions

ITA 383/JPR/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Mar 2017AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Prithivi Raj Meena (Addl. CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 50C

…passed as he could not have paid the same to himself. It would be relevant at this stage to refer to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court wherein the application of doctrine of ‘Substance over Form’ in the case of Vodafone International Holdings vs. UOI-341 ITR 1 (SC) and in the case of McDowell Co. Ltd. vs. CTO-154 ITR 148 (SC) has been upheld. The appellant has received his share of money standing to the credit of capital account from the firm at the time of his retirement and the asset has remained with the firm. The appellant has admitted on oath these facts and ratified again before the AO in the cours…

Cairn Uk Holding Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. DCIT (International Taxation), New Delhi

In the result ground No. 5 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1669/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Mar 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Puri CIT
Section 143(3)Section 144

…saction is chargeable to tax in India. He further held that due to the amendment in the Income Tax Act by the Finance Act, 2012, interpretation made by the Hon‘ble Supreme Court of India in Vodafone International Holdings BV versus union of India and another (341 ITR 1) (SC) is not available to the assessee. He therefore held that Cairn India Ltd, an Indian company, has taken control of the assets and operations situated in India of cairn group which was acquired indirectly through purchase of shares of the holding company cairn India Holdings Ltd, which was incorporated in jersey, hence the capital gains arising…

Abercrombie & Kent India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 5742/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Mar 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri I. C. Sudhira N D Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Yadav, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT [DR]

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCHES : “I – 1” NEW DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI I. C. SUDHIR, JUDICIAL MEMBER A N D SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA. No. 4229/Del/2010 AND ITA. No. 5742/Del/2011 Assessment Years : 2006-07 & 2007-08. Abercrombie & Kent India Pvt. Ltd., Asstt. CIT, B–6/20, Local Shopping Centre, Vs. Central Circle : 23, Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 029. PAN : AAACA 5951 D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri P. C. Yadav, Adv., Shri Rishabh Jaitely, Adv.; Department by : Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT [DR] Date of Hearing : 20.12.2016 Date of Pron…

Abercrombie & Kent India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 4229/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Mar 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri I. C. Sudhira N D Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Yadav, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT [DR]

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCHES : “I – 1” NEW DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI I. C. SUDHIR, JUDICIAL MEMBER A N D SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA. No. 4229/Del/2010 AND ITA. No. 5742/Del/2011 Assessment Years : 2006-07 & 2007-08. Abercrombie & Kent India Pvt. Ltd., Asstt. CIT, B–6/20, Local Shopping Centre, Vs. Central Circle : 23, Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 029. PAN : AAACA 5951 D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri P. C. Yadav, Adv., Shri Rishabh Jaitely, Adv.; Department by : Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT [DR] Date of Hearing : 20.12.2016 Date of Pron…

I.T.O WD - 8(3), Kolkata vs. M/S Ruia Sons Pvt Ltd., Kolkata

In the result the appeal by the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 365/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Mar 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm] I.T.A No. 365/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 2009-10 I.T.O., Ward-8(3), -Vs.- M/S. Ruia Sons Pvt. Ltd. Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aaccr 3949 Q] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Shri Arup Kumar Sinha, Cit For The Respondent : Shri Manoj Kataruka, Advocate

For Appellant: Shri Arup Kumar Sinha, CITFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kataruka, Advocate
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 194JSection 301Section 40

…ot get permit, is directly: connected with assessee's carrying on of business - Such contribution is not against public policy, and is allowable under section 37(1)" (v) The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vodafone International Holdings B.V. v UOl (2012)341 ITR 1 has considered the McDowell case and it's other decisions and held by majority as follows :- "(i) It is the task of the court to ascertain the legal nature of the transaction and while doing so it has to look at the entire transaction as a whole and not adopt a dissecting approach, (ii) All tax planning is not Iegitimate or impermissible. (iii) The…

M/S Padmini Products Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for all the assessment years are dismissed

ITA 527/BANG/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Mar 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Raoshri Laliet Kumarm/S Padmini Products Pvt. Ltd., #157, K Kamaraj Road, Bengaluru-560 042. . Appellant Vs. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle-12(2) Bengaluru. . Respondent Appellant By : Shri Tatakrishna, Advocate Respondent By : Shri O.P Yadav, Cit Date Of Hearing : 1-3-2017 Date Of Pronouncement : -3-2017 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Tatakrishna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri O.P Yadav, CIT
Section 143(2)

…partners in a partnership firm which is joint and several in contrast to the rights and liabilities of the shareholders in a company. He has also relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Vodafone International holdings reported in 341 ITR 1 (SC) to bring out distinction between the holding company and wholly owned subsidiary in which the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that the legal relationship between the holding company and wholly owned subsidiary is that they are two legally distinct persons and holding company does not own the assets of a subsidiary and in law the management of t…

I.T.O WD - 7(3), Kolkata. vs. M/S Shalini Properties & Developers Private Limited., Kolkata

In the result the appeal preferred by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 171/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm] I.T.A No. 171/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 2009-10 I.T.O., Ward-7(3) -Vs.- M/S. Shalini Properties & Developers Kolkata Pvt. Limited., Kolkata [Pan : Aahcs 7896 N] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Shri Arup Kumar Sinha, Cit For The Respondent : Shri Manoj Kataruka, Advocate

For Appellant: Shri Arup Kumar Sinha, CITFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kataruka, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 301Section 37(1)

…ld not get permit directly connected with assessee’s carrying on of business – Such contribution is not against public policy, and is allowable under section 37(1)”. (v) The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Vodafone International Holding B.V. v UOI (2012) 341 ITR 1 has considered the Mcdowell case and it’s other decisions and held by majority as follows :- “ (i) It is the task of the court to ascertain the legal nature of the transaction and while doing so it has to look at the entire transaction as a whole and not adopt a dissecting approach. (ii) All tax planning is not illegitimate or impermissible. (iii)T…

ITO, WD-(It), Kolkata vs. M/S Emami Paper Mills Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 642/KOL/2016[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Jan 2017AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.642/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2012-2013) Income Tax Officer Vs. M/S Emami Paper Mills Ltd., (International Taxation), 687, Anandapur, E.M.Bypass, Ward, Kolkata, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700107 Room No. 215 Aayakar Bhavan Poorva, 110 Shantipalli,Kolkata-700107 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabcg 1428 Q .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By : Shri N.B.Som, Jcit Sr. Dr Assessee By : Shri Ramesh Kumar Patodia, Fca सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 20/12/2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 04/01/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Revenue, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2012-2013, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-22, Kolkata, In Appeal No.111/Cit(A)-22/Kol/14-13, Dated 20.01.2016, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 201(1)/1A Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (In Short The ‘Act’), Dated 28.03.2013. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Qua The Assessee Are That The Assessee Company, M/S.Emami Paper Mills Limited, Hereafter Called As ‘Deductor’ Has Remitted Some Amount To A Non-Resident Company Of Poland Without Deducting Taxes. Show Cause Notice U/S 201 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Was Issued To The Deductor. In Response, The Deductor Company Submitted M/S Emami Paper Mills Ltd.

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh Kumar Patodia, FCAFor Respondent: Shri N.B.Som, JCIT Sr. DR
Section 201Section 201(1)Section 5(2)Section 9(1)Section 9(1)(vii)

…nt that the AO should have considered the contract in totality and it is not proper to read a single sentence in a contract in isolation to reach a different inference. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Vodafone International Holdings B.V. vs UOI and Anr. 341 ITR 1, had held that an agreement has to be "looked at" and not "looked through". In the instant case the AO's attempt to read the submission of the appellant that "there is minimal use of highly skill technicians" to arrive at the conclusion that the nature of services rendered by POL falls under the category of "technical services" is erroneous in fact…

Iljin Electric Co. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) Cir 2(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal for A

ITA 1023/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz, Accoutant Member & Shri Saktijit Dey

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Jasbir Chauhan
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 234BSection 234D

…pplied in all cases. On a reading of the decision rendered in case of Roxar Maximum Reservoir Performance WLL (supra) it is noticed that heavy reliance has been placed on the proposition laid down in case of Vodafone International Holdings B.V vs. UOI (2012) 341 ITR 1, that look at approach instead up look through approach has to be taken. However, in the facts of the present case there is no need to adopt such approach as the IFB as well as contract document make the intention of the parties clear that the offshore supplies were to be kept as a distinct and separate transaction and not to be included with the o…

Sgl Entertainment Ltd, Mumbai vs. DDIT (It) 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed on this ground

ITA 32/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Sept 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amit Shukla, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.7680/Mum/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2008-2009 Satellite Television Asian Vs. Ddit(International Region Limited, C/O Star India Taxation)-2(1), Scindia Private Limited, Star House, Off House, Mumbai-400038 Dr. E.Moses Road, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai-400011 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaacs 5680 D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. & आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.7679/Mum/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2008-09) Channel V Music Networks Vs. Asstt. Director Of Income Limited Partnership (Channel V) Tax ( International C/O Star India Pvt. Limited, Star Taxation)1 (2) Scindia House, Office Dr. E Moses House, Mumbai-400038 Road, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai- 400011 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. :Aaefc6136H (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. & आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.7681/Mum/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2008-09) Star International Movies Vs. Ddit ( It) 2(1) Limited(Siml) C/O Star India Scindia House, Mumbai- Private Limited, Star House, Off 400038 Dr. E.Moses Road, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai-400011 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaics3256P (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 253

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ ‘के’, म ुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JM आमकय अऩीर सं./ITA No.7680/Mum/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2008-2009 Satellite Television Asian Vs. DDIT(International Region Limited, C/o STAR India Taxation)-2(1), Scindia Private Limited, Star House, off House, Mumbai-400038 Dr. E.Moses Road, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai-400011 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ PAN/GIR No. : AAACS 5680 D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. AND आमकय अऩीर सं./ITA No.7679/Mum/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2008-09…

Star Television Entertainment Ltd ( Since Amalgamated With Star India P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DDIT (It) 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed on this ground

ITA 7684/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Sept 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amit Shukla, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.7680/Mum/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2008-2009 Satellite Television Asian Vs. Ddit(International Region Limited, C/O Star India Taxation)-2(1), Scindia Private Limited, Star House, Off House, Mumbai-400038 Dr. E.Moses Road, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai-400011 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaacs 5680 D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. & आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.7679/Mum/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2008-09) Channel V Music Networks Vs. Asstt. Director Of Income Limited Partnership (Channel V) Tax ( International C/O Star India Pvt. Limited, Star Taxation)1 (2) Scindia House, Office Dr. E Moses House, Mumbai-400038 Road, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai- 400011 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. :Aaefc6136H (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. & आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.7681/Mum/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2008-09) Star International Movies Vs. Ddit ( It) 2(1) Limited(Siml) C/O Star India Scindia House, Mumbai- Private Limited, Star House, Off 400038 Dr. E.Moses Road, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai-400011 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaics3256P (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 253

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ ‘के’, म ुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JM आमकय अऩीर सं./ITA No.7680/Mum/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2008-2009 Satellite Television Asian Vs. DDIT(International Region Limited, C/o STAR India Taxation)-2(1), Scindia Private Limited, Star House, off House, Mumbai-400038 Dr. E.Moses Road, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai-400011 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ PAN/GIR No. : AAACS 5680 D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. AND आमकय अऩीर सं./ITA No.7679/Mum/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2008-09…

Satr Asia Region Fz Llc (Since Amalgamated With Star India P.Ltd), Mumbai vs. DDIT (It) 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed on this ground

ITA 7683/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Sept 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amit Shukla, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.7680/Mum/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2008-2009 Satellite Television Asian Vs. Ddit(International Region Limited, C/O Star India Taxation)-2(1), Scindia Private Limited, Star House, Off House, Mumbai-400038 Dr. E.Moses Road, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai-400011 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaacs 5680 D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. & आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.7679/Mum/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2008-09) Channel V Music Networks Vs. Asstt. Director Of Income Limited Partnership (Channel V) Tax ( International C/O Star India Pvt. Limited, Star Taxation)1 (2) Scindia House, Office Dr. E Moses House, Mumbai-400038 Road, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai- 400011 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. :Aaefc6136H (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. & आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.7681/Mum/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2008-09) Star International Movies Vs. Ddit ( It) 2(1) Limited(Siml) C/O Star India Scindia House, Mumbai- Private Limited, Star House, Off 400038 Dr. E.Moses Road, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai-400011 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaics3256P (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 253

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ ‘के’, म ुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JM आमकय अऩीर सं./ITA No.7680/Mum/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2008-2009 Satellite Television Asian Vs. DDIT(International Region Limited, C/o STAR India Taxation)-2(1), Scindia Private Limited, Star House, off House, Mumbai-400038 Dr. E.Moses Road, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai-400011 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ PAN/GIR No. : AAACS 5680 D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. AND आमकय अऩीर सं./ITA No.7679/Mum/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2008-09…