ITO v. Susanto Purnamo

73 Taxmann.com 108Reported decision2016#14391 most cited
7

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2019.

Judgments citing ITO v. Susanto Purnamo

M/S. Wifi Networks P Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, appeal field by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2325/BANG/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Oct 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V Vasudevan, Vice Presidnet & Shri B.R Baskaranassessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Sudheendra B.R, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 40Section 40aSection 9(1)(vi)

…Germany was involved where in article 12 does not specifically exclude income covered article 14 of the DTAA. Further ld AR has relied up on the Decision of The coordinate benches in case of 86 ITD 384 in case of Graphite India and another decision in case of 73 Taxmann.com 108 where the issue involved was Indo US Tax Treaty, where the Article 12(5)(e) specifically excluded income covered under Independent personal Services , therefore, they do not apply to the facts before us as there is no such specific exclusion in Article 12 of Indo German Tax Treaty.” 8. From the above para reproduced from this Tribunal ord…

M/S Wifi Networks Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-17(1)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 943/BANG/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Apr 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Wifi Networks P Ltd., The Deputy No. 427, 80 Feet Circular Commissioner Of Road, Vs. Income Tax, 6Th Block, Koramangala, Circle 7 (1) (2), Bangalore – 560 095. Bangalore. Pan: Aaacw5293L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri B.R. Sudheendra, Ca Revenue By : Shri T.N. Prakash, Addl. Cit (Dr)

For Appellant: Shri B.R. Sudheendra, CAFor Respondent: Shri T.N. Prakash, Addl. CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

…Germany was involved where in article 12 does not specifically exclude income covered article 14 of the DTAA. Further ld AR has relied up on the Decision of The coordinate benches in case of 86 ITD 384 in case of Graphite India and another decision in case of 73 Taxmann.com 108 where the issue involved was Indo US Tax Treaty, where the Article 12(5)(e) specifically excluded income covered under Independent personal Services , therefore, they do not apply to the facts before us as there is no such specific exclusion in Article 12 of Indo German Tax Treaty.” 8. From the above para reproduced from this Tribunal ord…

M/S. Poddar Pigments Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Accordingly, the solitary ground of the appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12 is allowed

ITA 5086/DEL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishim/S. Poddar Pigments Ltd, Vs. Acit, A-283, Ground Floor, Circle-14(1), Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-I, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaacp1125E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmed, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40Section 9(1)

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M/s. Poddar Pigments Ltd, Vs. ACIT, A-283, Ground Floor, Circle-14(1), Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-I, New Delhi New Delhi PAN: AAACP1125E (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No. 5084, 5085, and 5086/Del/2014 (Assessment Year: 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12) M/s. Poddar Pigments Ltd, Vs. DCIT, A-283, Ground Floor, Circle-14(1), Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-I, New Delhi New Delhi PAN: AAACP1125E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri P.C. Parwal, FCA Revenue by: S…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Ford India Pvt. Ltd., Kancheepuram

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for the assessment year 2012-13 is thus allowed

ITA 840/CHNY/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2017AY 2012-13
Section 195Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vii)

…I.T.A. Nos. 673, 840, 748 and 749 /Chny/2015 Assessment Years: 2011-12 and 2012-13 Page 1 of 55 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE T RIBUNAL, CHENNAI D BENCH, CHENNAI [Coram: Pramod Kumar AM and G Pavan Kumar JM] I.T.A. Nos. 673 and 840 /Chny/2015 Assessment years: 2011-12 and 2012-13 Dy Commissioner of Income Tax LTU -II, Chennai ……………………..........Appellant Vs Ford India Limited ……………………......Respondent S P Koil Post, Chengalpattu 603 204 Kanchipuram [PAN: AAACM4454H] I.T.A. Nos. 748 and 749 /Chny/2015 Assessment years: 2011-12 and 2012-13 Ford India Limited ……………………..........Appellant S P Koil Post, Chengalpattu 603 2…

Ford India Private Limited, Kancheepuram vs. ITO, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for the assessment year 2012-13 is thus allowed

ITA 749/CHNY/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2017AY 2012-13
Section 195Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vii)

…I.T.A. Nos. 673, 840, 748 and 749 /Chny/2015 Assessment Years: 2011-12 and 2012-13 Page 1 of 55 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE T RIBUNAL, CHENNAI D BENCH, CHENNAI [Coram: Pramod Kumar AM and G Pavan Kumar JM] I.T.A. Nos. 673 and 840 /Chny/2015 Assessment years: 2011-12 and 2012-13 Dy Commissioner of Income Tax LTU -II, Chennai ……………………..........Appellant Vs Ford India Limited ……………………......Respondent S P Koil Post, Chengalpattu 603 204 Kanchipuram [PAN: AAACM4454H] I.T.A. Nos. 748 and 749 /Chny/2015 Assessment years: 2011-12 and 2012-13 Ford India Limited ……………………..........Appellant S P Koil Post, Chengalpattu 603 2…

Ford India Private Limited, Kancheepuram vs. ITO, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for the assessment year 2012-13 is thus allowed

ITA 748/CHNY/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2017AY 2011-12
Section 195Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vii)

…I.T.A. Nos. 673, 840, 748 and 749 /Chny/2015 Assessment Years: 2011-12 and 2012-13 Page 1 of 55 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE T RIBUNAL, CHENNAI D BENCH, CHENNAI [Coram: Pramod Kumar AM and G Pavan Kumar JM] I.T.A. Nos. 673 and 840 /Chny/2015 Assessment years: 2011-12 and 2012-13 Dy Commissioner of Income Tax LTU -II, Chennai ……………………..........Appellant Vs Ford India Limited ……………………......Respondent S P Koil Post, Chengalpattu 603 204 Kanchipuram [PAN: AAACM4454H] I.T.A. Nos. 748 and 749 /Chny/2015 Assessment years: 2011-12 and 2012-13 Ford India Limited ……………………..........Appellant S P Koil Post, Chengalpattu 603 2…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Ford India Pvt. Ltd., Kancheepuram

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for the assessment year 2012-13 is thus allowed

ITA 673/CHNY/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2017AY 2011-12
Section 195Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vii)

…I.T.A. Nos. 673, 840, 748 and 749 /Chny/2015 Assessment Years: 2011-12 and 2012-13 Page 1 of 55 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE T RIBUNAL, CHENNAI D BENCH, CHENNAI [Coram: Pramod Kumar AM and G Pavan Kumar JM] I.T.A. Nos. 673 and 840 /Chny/2015 Assessment years: 2011-12 and 2012-13 Dy Commissioner of Income Tax LTU -II, Chennai ……………………..........Appellant Vs Ford India Limited ……………………......Respondent S P Koil Post, Chengalpattu 603 204 Kanchipuram [PAN: AAACM4454H] I.T.A. Nos. 748 and 749 /Chny/2015 Assessment years: 2011-12 and 2012-13 Ford India Limited ……………………..........Appellant S P Koil Post, Chengalpattu 603 2…

ITO v. Susanto Purnamo (73 Taxmann.com 108) — Cited in 7 Judgments | BharatTax