ITO v. Right Florists (P) Ltd.

143 ITD 445Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2013#8944 most cited
12

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 12Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 234ASection 234BSection 270ASection 274Section 5(4)

Issues it is cited on

agency pesection 9(l)(vi)dependent agent pesection 9(l)clarificatory amendmentfixed place pesection 92esection 90(2)section 144c(3)copyrighted articleretrospective amendmentsection 91

Judgments citing ITO v. Right Florists (P) Ltd.

INTERNATIONAL AIR TRANSPORT ASSOCIATION,MUMBAI (FOR SENDING NOTICES) vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) - CIRCLE 2(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3330/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3330/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2020-21) International Air V/S. Dcit (It), Circle 2(2)(1), Transport Association बिधम Mumbai C/O Ernst & Young Llp Room No. 1722, 17Th Floor, 14Th Floor, The Ruby, 29, Air India Building, Senapati Bapat Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai, Dadar (West), Mumbai, Maharashtra-400021 Maharashtra-400028 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aacci4695N Appellant/अपीलधर्थी .. Respondent/प्रनिवधदी

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka and Shri DiveshFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar

…ee for a simplicitor providing of advertisement space to the customers in its publications/manuals or website cannot be held as 'royalty'. Our aforesaid view is supported by the order of the ITAT, Kolkata in the case of ITO Vs. Right Florists Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 143 ITD 445 (Kol). In the said case, it was observed by the Tribunal that payment made by assessee for online advertisement to Yahoo and Google was not in the nature of 'royalty'. A similar view had also been arrived at by the ITAT, Mumbai in the case of Pinstorm Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO (2013) 154 TTJ 0173 (Mum). In the said case, it was observed by t…

INTERNATIONAL AIR TRANSPORT ASSOCIATION (CANADA) ,MUMBAI vs. ACIT (IT), RANGE 2 (2)(1), MUMBAI

Accordingly Ground No. 3 to 7 are allowed

ITA 7117/MUM/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka, Shri DiveshFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 234A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE PRESIDENT & MS PADMAVATHY S, AM I.T.A. No. 7072/Mum/2019 (Assessment Year: 2011-12) I.T.A. No. 7117/Mum/2019 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) International Air Transport Assistant Commissioner of Association (Canada), Income Tax (International Ernst & Young LLP, 6th Floor, Taxation), Circle-2(2)(1), Vs. Room No. 1722, 17th Floor, The Ruby, 29, Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar (West), Mumbai-400028. Air India Building, Nariman PAN : AACCI4659N Point, Mumbai-400021. Appellant) : Respondent) I.T.A. No. 7416/Mum/2017 (Assessment Year: 2014-15)…

INTERNATIONAL AIR ASSOCIATION (CANADA),MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) RANGE 2 (2)(1), MUMBAI

Accordingly Ground No. 3 to 7 are allowed

ITA 7072/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka, Shri DiveshFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 234A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE PRESIDENT & MS PADMAVATHY S, AM I.T.A. No. 7072/Mum/2019 (Assessment Year: 2011-12) I.T.A. No. 7117/Mum/2019 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) International Air Transport Assistant Commissioner of Association (Canada), Income Tax (International Ernst & Young LLP, 6th Floor, Taxation), Circle-2(2)(1), Vs. Room No. 1722, 17th Floor, The Ruby, 29, Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar (West), Mumbai-400028. Air India Building, Nariman PAN : AACCI4659N Point, Mumbai-400021. Appellant) : Respondent) I.T.A. No. 7416/Mum/2017 (Assessment Year: 2014-15)…

INTERNATINAL AIR TRANSPORT ASSOCIATION (CANADA),MUMBAI vs. DCIT (IT) 2(2)(1), MUMBAI

Accordingly Ground No. 3 to 7 are allowed

ITA 7416/MUM/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka, Shri DiveshFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 234A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE PRESIDENT & MS PADMAVATHY S, AM I.T.A. No. 7072/Mum/2019 (Assessment Year: 2011-12) I.T.A. No. 7117/Mum/2019 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) International Air Transport Assistant Commissioner of Association (Canada), Income Tax (International Ernst & Young LLP, 6th Floor, Taxation), Circle-2(2)(1), Vs. Room No. 1722, 17th Floor, The Ruby, 29, Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar (West), Mumbai-400028. Air India Building, Nariman PAN : AACCI4659N Point, Mumbai-400021. Appellant) : Respondent) I.T.A. No. 7416/Mum/2017 (Assessment Year: 2014-15)…

TAJ TV LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DY CIT (IT) 4(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed, while the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 894/MUM/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sant
Section 250

…e Revenue to show that the assessee had a taxable income under the DTAA, and then the burden is on the assessee to show that its income is exempt under DTAA. Similarly, was held by the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in ITO v. Right Florists (P) Ltd. [2013] 143 ITD 445 (Kol-Trib.). In view of the above, Taj India cannot be held to be dependent agent P.E. of the assessee in India under Article 5(4)(i) of the India Mauritius DTAA with respect to the distribution revenue. Accordingly, to this extent order passed by the CIT(A) is upheld and the grounds raised by the Revenue are dismissed.‖ 14. It is evident from t…

DCIT (IT) 4(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. TAJ TV LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed, while the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1351/MUM/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sant
Section 250

…e Revenue to show that the assessee had a taxable income under the DTAA, and then the burden is on the assessee to show that its income is exempt under DTAA. Similarly, was held by the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in ITO v. Right Florists (P) Ltd. [2013] 143 ITD 445 (Kol-Trib.). In view of the above, Taj India cannot be held to be dependent agent P.E. of the assessee in India under Article 5(4)(i) of the India Mauritius DTAA with respect to the distribution revenue. Accordingly, to this extent order passed by the CIT(A) is upheld and the grounds raised by the Revenue are dismissed.‖ 14. It is evident from t…

DCIT (IT)-4(1) (2) , MUMBAI vs. M/S. TAJ TV. LTD, MUMBAI

The appeals are dismissed

ITA 1718/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Rajneesh Yadav, D.R

…Revenue to show that the assessee had a taxable income under the DTAA, and then the burden is on the assessee to show that its income is exempt under DTAA. Similarly, was held by the Co- ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in ITO v. Right Florists (P) Ltd. [2013] 143 ITD 445 (Kol-Trib.). In view of the above, Taj India cannot be held to be dependent agent P.E. of the assessee in India under Article 5(4)(i) of the India Mauritius DTAA with respect to the distribution revenue. Accordingly, to this extent order passed by the CIT(A) is upheld and the grounds raised by the Revenue are dismissed. 15. Insofar as the appeal…

DCIT (IT) -4(1) (2) , MUMBAI vs. M/S. TAJ TV LTD, MUMBAI

The appeals are dismissed

ITA 1717/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 May 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Rajneesh Yadav, D.R

…Revenue to show that the assessee had a taxable income under the DTAA, and then the burden is on the assessee to show that its income is exempt under DTAA. Similarly, was held by the Co- ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in ITO v. Right Florists (P) Ltd. [2013] 143 ITD 445 (Kol-Trib.). In view of the above, Taj India cannot be held to be dependent agent P.E. of the assessee in India under Article 5(4)(i) of the India Mauritius DTAA with respect to the distribution revenue. Accordingly, to this extent order passed by the CIT(A) is upheld and the grounds raised by the Revenue are dismissed. 15. Insofar as the appeal…

TAJ TV LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -4(1) (2), MUMBAI

The appeals are dismissed

ITA 1462/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 May 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Rajneesh Yadav, D.R

…Revenue to show that the assessee had a taxable income under the DTAA, and then the burden is on the assessee to show that its income is exempt under DTAA. Similarly, was held by the Co- ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in ITO v. Right Florists (P) Ltd. [2013] 143 ITD 445 (Kol-Trib.). In view of the above, Taj India cannot be held to be dependent agent P.E. of the assessee in India under Article 5(4)(i) of the India Mauritius DTAA with respect to the distribution revenue. Accordingly, to this extent order passed by the CIT(A) is upheld and the grounds raised by the Revenue are dismissed. 15. Insofar as the appeal…

TAJ TV LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) -4 (1) (2) , MUMBAI

The appeals are dismissed

ITA 1461/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 May 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Rajneesh Yadav, D.R

…Revenue to show that the assessee had a taxable income under the DTAA, and then the burden is on the assessee to show that its income is exempt under DTAA. Similarly, was held by the Co- ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in ITO v. Right Florists (P) Ltd. [2013] 143 ITD 445 (Kol-Trib.). In view of the above, Taj India cannot be held to be dependent agent P.E. of the assessee in India under Article 5(4)(i) of the India Mauritius DTAA with respect to the distribution revenue. Accordingly, to this extent order passed by the CIT(A) is upheld and the grounds raised by the Revenue are dismissed. 15. Insofar as the appeal…

TAJ TV LTD,MAURITIUS vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)- 4 (1) (2), MUMBAI

The appeals are dismissed

ITA 1460/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Rajneesh Yadav, D.R

…Revenue to show that the assessee had a taxable income under the DTAA, and then the burden is on the assessee to show that its income is exempt under DTAA. Similarly, was held by the Co- ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in ITO v. Right Florists (P) Ltd. [2013] 143 ITD 445 (Kol-Trib.). In view of the above, Taj India cannot be held to be dependent agent P.E. of the assessee in India under Article 5(4)(i) of the India Mauritius DTAA with respect to the distribution revenue. Accordingly, to this extent order passed by the CIT(A) is upheld and the grounds raised by the Revenue are dismissed. 15. Insofar as the appeal…

TAJ TV LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (IT) 4(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed, while the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid findings

ITA 6588/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal a/wFor Respondent: Shri Milind S. Chavan, Sr. AR
Section 250Section 90(2)Section 92E

…e Revenue to show that the assessee had a taxable income under the DTAA, and then the burden is on the assessee to show that its income is exempt under DTAA. Similarly, was held by the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in ITO v. Right Florists (P) Ltd. [2013] 143 ITD 445 (Kol-Trib.). In view of the above, Taj India cannot be held to be dependent agent P.E. of the assessee in India under Article 5(4)(i) of the India Mauritius DTAA with respect to the distribution revenue. Accordingly, to this extent order passed by the CIT(A) is upheld and the grounds raised by the Revenue are dismissed. 15. Insofar as the appeal…