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

Nina Kshetry, Noida vs. ACIT, Circle Int.Tax. 2(1)(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assesses in ITA 1876/Del/2023, ITA

ITA 1878/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. C.N. Prasad & Sh. Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2016-17

Section 148

…egard was placed on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case Page 16 of 37 ITA No.1876/Del/2023 AY2016-17 Sangita Kshetry &Oths Vs ACIT Circle – Int. Tax. 2 (1)(2) New Delhi of Vodafone International Holdings B.V. v. Union of India and Ors. (2012) 341 ITR 1 (SC). 19. Therefore, it was submitted that the Ld. AO has grossly erred in recharacterizing the transaction of sale of shares and treating it as a transaction of sale of assets. It is also submitted that the Ld. AO has grossly erred in disregarding the true nature of the transaction and recharacterizing the transaction of "sale of shares" to "sale…

Hersh Vardhan Kshetry, Noida vs. ACIT, Circle Int. Tax. 2(1)(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assesses in ITA 1876/Del/2023, ITA

ITA 1877/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. C.N. Prasad & Sh. Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2016-17

Section 148

…egard was placed on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case Page 16 of 37 ITA No.1876/Del/2023 AY2016-17 Sangita Kshetry &Oths Vs ACIT Circle – Int. Tax. 2 (1)(2) New Delhi of Vodafone International Holdings B.V. v. Union of India and Ors. (2012) 341 ITR 1 (SC). 19. Therefore, it was submitted that the Ld. AO has grossly erred in recharacterizing the transaction of sale of shares and treating it as a transaction of sale of assets. It is also submitted that the Ld. AO has grossly erred in disregarding the true nature of the transaction and recharacterizing the transaction of "sale of shares" to "sale…

Sangita Kshetry, Noida vs. ACIT, Circle Int.Tax. 2(1)(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assesses in ITA 1876/Del/2023, ITA

ITA 1876/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. C.N. Prasad & Sh. Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2016-17

Section 148

…egard was placed on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case Page 16 of 37 ITA No.1876/Del/2023 AY2016-17 Sangita Kshetry &Oths Vs ACIT Circle – Int. Tax. 2 (1)(2) New Delhi of Vodafone International Holdings B.V. v. Union of India and Ors. (2012) 341 ITR 1 (SC). 19. Therefore, it was submitted that the Ld. AO has grossly erred in recharacterizing the transaction of sale of shares and treating it as a transaction of sale of assets. It is also submitted that the Ld. AO has grossly erred in disregarding the true nature of the transaction and recharacterizing the transaction of "sale of shares" to "sale…

Bando India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ITO, Ward- 1(3), Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as indicated above

ITA 606/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prakash Chand Yadav & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2013-14]

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, ‘H’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [Assessment Year: 2013-14] Bando India Pvt. Ltd. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3), Plot No.436, Sector-8, IMT Vanijya Nikunj, HSIIDC Building, Manesar, Gurgaon, Vs 5th Floor, Udyog Viohar, Phase-V, Haryana-122050 Gurgaon, Haryana- PAN-AACCB2994D Appellant Respondent Appellant by Shri Arun Kishore, CA & Shri Alok Suri, CA Respondent by Shri S K Jadhav, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 06.05.2025 Date of Pronouncement 16.05.2025 ORDER PER PRAKASH CHAND YADAV,…

Jsw Energy Limited, Mumbai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 8(3), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals are allowed partly for statistical

ITA 3714/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Mar 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

For Appellant: Mr. Gaurav KabraFor Respondent: Ms. Neena Jeph, CIT-DR/
Section 115JSection 14ASection 37Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “K” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA Nos.3714/MUM/2024 Assessment Year: 2020-21 JSW Energy Ltd., 2nd floor, JSW Centre, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai-400051. PAN NO. AAACJ 8109 N Appellant Vs. The Asst. CIT, Central Circle-8(3), Room No. 659, 6th floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Maharishi Karve Road, Mumbai-400020. Respondent ITA Nos.3713/MUM/2024 Assessment Year: 2020-21 JSW Energy (Barmer) Ltd., 2nd floor, JSW Centre, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai-400051. PAN NO. AAACR8812 N…

Jsw Energy (Barmer) Limited, Mumbai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 8(3), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals are allowed partly for statistical

ITA 3713/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Mar 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

For Appellant: Ms. Neena Jeph, CIT-DR/For Respondent: Mr. Gaurav Kabra
Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “K” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA Nos. 3714 /MUM/2024 Assessment Year: 2020-21 JSW Energy Ltd., The Asst. CIT, Central Circle-8(3), 2nd floor, JSW Centre, Bandra Room No. 659, 6th floor, Aayakar Vs. Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Bhavan, Maharishi Karve Road, Mumbai-400051. Mumbai-400020. PAN NO. AAACJ 8109 N Appellant Respondent ITA Nos. 3713/MUM/2024 Assessment Year: 2020-21 JSW Energy (Barmer) Ltd., The Asst. CIT, Central Circle-8(3), 2nd floor, JSW Centre, Bandra Room No. 659, 6th floor,…

Brij Raj Singh Rathaur, New Delhi vs. JCIT, Range-41, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 315/DEL/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jan 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.315/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2016-17 बनाम Dcit, Sukhbir Singh Chabra Huf Circle 61(1), Vs. 6, Rani Jhansi Road, Delhi. Motia Khan, Delhi. Pan No.Aaahs5683P अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 133(6)Section 44ASection 92C

…hether the transaction is a tax deferment / saving device, rather, it has to apply the "look at test" to ascertain the true legal nature, for genuine strategic tax planning is permissible, as has been held in Vodafone International Holdings B.V. v. UOI (2012) 341 ITR 1 (SC). At page 108 of the report, Hon'ble Apex Court has observed that: "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 contrary to what has been laid down i…

Sandeep Mohanraj Singhi, Ahmedabad vs. ACIT, Circle4(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 769/AHD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2018-19

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 68

…he transactions cannot be held as in-genuine. Hon’ble Supreme Court had held in the case of Vodafone International Holding BV v. Union of India [2012] Assessment Years: 2018-19 ACIT(E) vs. Dr. KR Shroff Foundation Page 11 of 24 taxmann.com 202/204 Taxman 408/341 ITR 1 that there was nothing wrong if the funds for making FDI by Mauritius companies/individuals had not originated from Mauritius but had come from investors of third countries. In view of this judgement, the Revenue's contention that funds for purchase of shares had come not from the assessee but from its holding company in Mauritius, so as to treat t…

Indus Towers Limited (Formerly Known As Bharti Infratel Ltd and As Successor in Interest of Erstwhile Indus Tower Ltd), Gurugram, Haryana vs. DCIT, Circle 12(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2762/DEL/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarindus Towers Ltd (Formerly Vs. Dcit, Known As Bharti Infratel Ltd), Circle-12(1), 4Th Floor, Dlf Cybercity, New Delhi Building No. 10, Tower A, Dlf Qe, So Gurgaon, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aadcv0274F Acit, Vs. Indus Towers Ltd, 4Th Floor, Dlf Cybercity, Central Circle-10, New Delhi Gurgaon, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aadcv0274F Indus Towers Ltd (Formerly Vs. Dcit, Known As Bharti Infratel Ltd), Circle-12(1), 4Th Floor, Dlf Cybercity, New Delhi Building No. 10, Tower A, Dlf Qe, So Gurgaon, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aadcv0274F Assessee By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv Shri Rohit Jain, Adv Shri Deepesh Jain, Adv Ms. Shaurya Jain, Ca Revenue By: Shri Mukesh Kumar Jain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 12/09/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 10/12/2024

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Kumar Jain, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 139(5)Section 142Section 143(3)Section 148

…arded by the Revenue at whims and fancies without any justifiable reason. It may be pointed out that multilayered holding subsidiary company structure is well recognized by the apex court in the case of Vodaphone International Holdings B. V. V. Union of India 341 ITR 1. The Court categorically held that one has to merely look at the transaction and not look through the same. OpCos have The AO has grossly erred in holding that merely circuitously retained due to their shareholding in the appellant ownership of PIAs due company, the Opcos have not divested to their shareholding in themselves of the property in the…

ACIT, Circle 10, New Delhi vs. Indus Tower Limited, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2212/DEL/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarindus Towers Ltd (Formerly Vs. Dcit, Known As Bharti Infratel Ltd), Circle-12(1), 4Th Floor, Dlf Cybercity, New Delhi Building No. 10, Tower A, Dlf Qe, So Gurgaon, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aadcv0274F Acit, Vs. Indus Towers Ltd, 4Th Floor, Dlf Cybercity, Central Circle-10, New Delhi Gurgaon, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aadcv0274F Indus Towers Ltd (Formerly Vs. Dcit, Known As Bharti Infratel Ltd), Circle-12(1), 4Th Floor, Dlf Cybercity, New Delhi Building No. 10, Tower A, Dlf Qe, So Gurgaon, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aadcv0274F Assessee By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv Shri Rohit Jain, Adv Shri Deepesh Jain, Adv Ms. Shaurya Jain, Ca Revenue By: Shri Mukesh Kumar Jain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 12/09/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 10/12/2024

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Kumar Jain, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 139(5)Section 142Section 143(3)Section 148

…arded by the Revenue at whims and fancies without any justifiable reason. It may be pointed out that multilayered holding subsidiary company structure is well recognized by the apex court in the case of Vodaphone International Holdings B. V. V. Union of India 341 ITR 1. The Court categorically held that one has to merely look at the transaction and not look through the same. OpCos have The AO has grossly erred in holding that merely circuitously retained due to their shareholding in the appellant ownership of PIAs due company, the Opcos have not divested to their shareholding in themselves of the property in the…

Indus Towers Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT Circle 12(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1962/DEL/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarindus Towers Ltd (Formerly Vs. Dcit, Known As Bharti Infratel Ltd), Circle-12(1), 4Th Floor, Dlf Cybercity, New Delhi Building No. 10, Tower A, Dlf Qe, So Gurgaon, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aadcv0274F Acit, Vs. Indus Towers Ltd, 4Th Floor, Dlf Cybercity, Central Circle-10, New Delhi Gurgaon, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aadcv0274F Indus Towers Ltd (Formerly Vs. Dcit, Known As Bharti Infratel Ltd), Circle-12(1), 4Th Floor, Dlf Cybercity, New Delhi Building No. 10, Tower A, Dlf Qe, So Gurgaon, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aadcv0274F Assessee By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv Shri Rohit Jain, Adv Shri Deepesh Jain, Adv Ms. Shaurya Jain, Ca Revenue By: Shri Mukesh Kumar Jain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 12/09/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 10/12/2024

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Kumar Jain, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 139(5)Section 142Section 143(3)Section 148

…arded by the Revenue at whims and fancies without any justifiable reason. It may be pointed out that multilayered holding subsidiary company structure is well recognized by the apex court in the case of Vodaphone International Holdings B. V. V. Union of India 341 ITR 1. The Court categorically held that one has to merely look at the transaction and not look through the same. OpCos have The AO has grossly erred in holding that merely circuitously retained due to their shareholding in the appellant ownership of PIAs due company, the Opcos have not divested to their shareholding in themselves of the property in the…

Kay Power and Paper Limited, Satara vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Satara

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

ITA 1437/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani KumarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 148Section 148A

…upposedly resulting in some economic determent or prejudice to the national interest, as perceived by the respondents. 16. He also relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vodafone International Holding B.V. vs. Union of India (2012) 341 ITR 1 (SC), where it has been held that the transactions must be looked at as a whole and not dissected. 17. He submitted that while dealing with the ground challenging the absence of information / circumstances that income has, allegedly, escaped assessment, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC has referred to the availability of certain information with the departme…

Kay Power and Paper Limited, Satara vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Satara

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

ITA 1436/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani KumarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 148Section 148A

…upposedly resulting in some economic determent or prejudice to the national interest, as perceived by the respondents. 16. He also relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vodafone International Holding B.V. vs. Union of India (2012) 341 ITR 1 (SC), where it has been held that the transactions must be looked at as a whole and not dissected. 17. He submitted that while dealing with the ground challenging the absence of information / circumstances that income has, allegedly, escaped assessment, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC has referred to the availability of certain information with the departme…

Tiger Global Eight Holdings, Mauritius vs. DCIT Intl. Taxation Circle 3(1)(1), New Delhi

ITA 2345/DEL/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2020-21 Tiger Global Eight Holdings, Vs Dcit, C/O 202 Rajnigandha International Taxation, Apartment, Circle 3(1)(1), Prof. V.S. Agashe Path, New Delhi. Dadar (West), Mumbai 400 028, Maharashtra. Pan: Aafct0276M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Porus Kaka, Sr. Advocate; Shri Manish Kant, Advocate; & Ms Amrita Shenoy & Hetal Jakharia, Cas Revenue By : Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 25.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 144C(13)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : D : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2020-21 Tiger Global Eight Holdings, Vs DCIT, C/o 202 Rajnigandha International Taxation, Apartment, Circle 3(1)(1), Prof. V.S. Agashe Path, New Delhi. Dadar (West), Mumbai 400 028, Maharashtra. PAN: AAFCT0276M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Porus Kaka, Sr. Advocate; Shri Manish Kant, Advocate; and Ms Amrita Shenoy & Hetal Jakharia, CAs Revenue by : Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 25.07.2024 Date of Pronouncemen…

Superb Mind Holdings Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle 3(1)(2), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed, in the terms aforesaid

ITA 1832/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandraआअसं.1832/िद"ी/2023 (िन.व. 2020-21) M/S. Superb Mind Holdings Ltd., C/O Anita & Gadia, Chartered Accountant, F-45, Bhagat Singh Market, New Delhi 110001 Pan Aazcs-2945-Q ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Circle International Tax 3(1)(2), New Delhi

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr. Advocate with S/Shri Shailesh Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vijay B Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 112Section 143(3)Section 195

…and placing reliance on the decision rendered in the case of Bid Services Division (Mauritius) Ltd. vs. Authority of Advance Ruling (Income Tax) 453 ITR 461 (Bom) and the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Vodafone International Holding BV vs. UOI 341 ITR 1 held that long term capital gain on sale of shares in the case of assessee is not liable to be taxed in India. For the sake of completeness the relevant extract of findings of the Tribunal after considering various decisions on this issue are as under:- “9. Ratio of the above decision squarely applies to the facts of the assessee’s case. As could b…

Crm Services India Private Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed with consequential effect

ITA 1519/DEL/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Apr 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 254

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : I : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITAs No.1518 & 1519/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11 CRM Services India Private Limited, Vs DCIT, E-44/3, Ground Floor, Circle-4(2), Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-2, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 020. PAN: AABCC6211B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate, Shri Neeraj Jain, Advocate & Shri Abhishek Aggarwal, AR Revenue by : Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 17.01.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 08.04.2024 ORDER PE…

Crm Services India Private Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed with consequential effect

ITA 1518/DEL/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Apr 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 254

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : I : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITAs No.1518 & 1519/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11 CRM Services India Private Limited, Vs DCIT, E-44/3, Ground Floor, Circle-4(2), Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-2, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 020. PAN: AABCC6211B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate, Shri Neeraj Jain, Advocate & Shri Abhishek Aggarwal, AR Revenue by : Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 17.01.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 08.04.2024 ORDER PE…

Superb Mind Holding Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle Int Tax 3(1)(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1568/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.1568/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19

Section 112Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

…vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) in ITA No. 1023/Del/2022 (kindly see pages 9 to 30 of PB - II, Relevant Page 22 of PB - II Para 11). (d) Union of India vs. Azadi Bachao Andolan and Another (263 ITR 706), (e) Vodafone International holdings B.V Vs Union of India & Anr 341 ITR 1 [2012]” 5.3 In view of the aforesaid submissions and case laws, Ld. Counsel submitted that the assessee is a resident of Mauritius and entitled to the benefit given under India-Mauritius Tax treaty and more so, the investments so made by assessee – appellant are clearly grandfathered/ protected by Government of India Press Release dated 29.08.20…

ACIT 16(1), Mumbai vs. 9X Media P.Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 4600/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Rao, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Riddhi Mishra, CIT DR
Section 115Section 14ASection 35D

…being satisfactory. In this situation, the provisions of Sec.68 is clearly triggered. 011. At this stage, it will be profitable to make a reference to the judgment given by the Hon'ble SC in the case of Vodafone International Holding B. V. vs. Union of India 341 ITR 1 (SC) (2012). In this judgment, the Hon'ble SC has given certain tests which can be used to understand whether the transaction of investment by a foreign company into an Indian company is genuine or not. These tests are described in brief in the subsequent paragraphs: Look at Principle: (Para 60 of the order) It has been observed by the Hon'ble SC t…

9X Media P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 16(1), Mumbai

ITA 3606/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Rao, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Riddhi Mishra, CIT DR
Section 115Section 14ASection 35D

…being satisfactory. In this situation, the provisions of Sec.68 is clearly triggered. 011. At this stage, it will be profitable to make a reference to the judgment given by the Hon'ble SC in the case of Vodafone International Holding B. V. vs. Union of India 341 ITR 1 (SC) (2012). In this judgment, the Hon'ble SC has given certain tests which can be used to understand whether the transaction of investment by a foreign company into an Indian company is genuine or not. These tests are described in brief in the subsequent paragraphs: Look at Principle: (Para 60 of the order) It has been observed by the Hon'ble SC t…