What is Japan Airlines Co. Limited v. CIT authority for?

Payments made for services rendered, regardless of the nomenclature used, do not attract the provisions of Section 194-I of the Income Tax Act.

How many judgments cite Japan Airlines Co. Limited v. CIT?

23 judgments on BharatTax cite Japan Airlines Co. Limited v. CIT (377 ITR 372), spanning 2009 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Japan Airlines Co. Limited v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 194-I, Section 194C, Section 201(1), Section 201(1A), Section 143(3), Section 2(24)(x).

Japan Airlines Co. Limited v. CIT (377 ITR 372)

ORAVEL STAYS LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS ORAVEL STAYS PRIVATE LIMITED),GURUGRAM vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 6, NEW DELHI

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed as above

ITA 577/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 194Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40

…id for the use of ….; hence, provisions of section 194I of the Act did not get attracted in the present case. In support of his contention, the Ld. Sr. Counsel placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Japan Airlines company Ltd. 377 ITR 372 and also on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Apeejay Surrendera Park Hotels Ltd. (2016) 287 CTR 161, the decision of Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Krishna Oberoi 257 ITR 105 and on decisions of Tribunal in cases of Johnson Watch Company Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 1738/Del/2020 (Delhi), Sahana Dwellers (P.) Ltd. [2…

ORAVEL STAYS LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS ORAVEL STAYS PRIVATE LIMITED),GURUGRAM vs. DCIT CIRCLE 76(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed as above

ITA 452/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 194Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40

…id for the use of ….; hence, provisions of section 194I of the Act did not get attracted in the present case. In support of his contention, the Ld. Sr. Counsel placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Japan Airlines company Ltd. 377 ITR 372 and also on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Apeejay Surrendera Park Hotels Ltd. (2016) 287 CTR 161, the decision of Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Krishna Oberoi 257 ITR 105 and on decisions of Tribunal in cases of Johnson Watch Company Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 1738/Del/2020 (Delhi), Sahana Dwellers (P.) Ltd. [2…

SUMITA SINGHAL,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-17(4), NEW DELHI

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed as above

ITA 577/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 194Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40

…id for the use of ….; hence, provisions of section 194I of the Act did not get attracted in the present case. In support of his contention, the Ld. Sr. Counsel placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Japan Airlines company Ltd. 377 ITR 372 and also on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Apeejay Surrendera Park Hotels Ltd. (2016) 287 CTR 161, the decision of Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Krishna Oberoi 257 ITR 105 and on decisions of Tribunal in cases of Johnson Watch Company Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 1738/Del/2020 (Delhi), Sahana Dwellers (P.) Ltd. [2…

R V INTERIOR PVT. LTD. ,DELHI vs. PCIT, DELHI

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed as above

ITA 452/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 194Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40

…id for the use of ….; hence, provisions of section 194I of the Act did not get attracted in the present case. In support of his contention, the Ld. Sr. Counsel placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Japan Airlines company Ltd. 377 ITR 372 and also on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Apeejay Surrendera Park Hotels Ltd. (2016) 287 CTR 161, the decision of Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Krishna Oberoi 257 ITR 105 and on decisions of Tribunal in cases of Johnson Watch Company Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 1738/Del/2020 (Delhi), Sahana Dwellers (P.) Ltd. [2…

BENETTON INDIA P.LTD,GURGAON vs. JCIT TDS CIRCLE, GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5774/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Aug 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. C. N. Prasaddr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. S. K. Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. DR

Section 194Section 194CSection 201(1)

…t. 2 Benetton India Pvt. Ltd. 4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in disregarding that the applicability of ratio of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Japan Airlines Co. Ltd. v. CIT (2015) 377 ITR 372 and other judicial precedents quoted in the submission to the Appellant's facts. 5. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in disregarding that the relevant clarifications under CBDT Circular Nos. 715 and 558 are not applicable to the appellant company.” 3. Benetton India Private Limited is a wholly owne…

PVR LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-76(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 202/DEL/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. G. C. Srivastava, Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Nargas, Sr. DR

Section 194Section 194CSection 194ISection 201

…nt and are thus liable to TDS u/s 194C of the Act. 3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the ratio of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Japan Airlines Co. Ltd. v. CIT (2015) 377 ITR 372 is not applicable in the Appellant’s case. 4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the relevant clarifications under CBDT Circular Nos. 715, 558 and 1/2008 are not applicable to the Appellant’s facts. 5. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred i…

PVR LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-76(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 7290/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. G. C. Srivastava, Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Nargas, Sr. DR

Section 194Section 194CSection 194ISection 201

…nt and are thus liable to TDS u/s 194C of the Act. 3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the ratio of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Japan Airlines Co. Ltd. v. CIT (2015) 377 ITR 372 is not applicable in the Appellant’s case. 4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the relevant clarifications under CBDT Circular Nos. 715, 558 and 1/2008 are not applicable to the Appellant’s facts. 5. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred i…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S BANGALORE METRO RAIL CORPORATION LTD

ITA/60/2014HC Karnataka30 Jun 2022

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

Section 260Section 9(1)(vii)

…h would be income of the recipient chargeable under the head ‘Salaries’ ” 8 (2017)392 ITR 186 (SC) (para 15) 9 (2015)60 Taxmann.com 71 (SC) I.T.A. No.60/2014 C/W I.T.A. No.59/2014 11 15. It was argued by Shri. Aravind that the…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S BANGALORE METRO RAIL CORPORATION LTD.,

ITA/59/2014HC Karnataka30 Jun 2022

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

Section 260Section 9(1)(vii)

…h would be income of the recipient chargeable under the head ‘Salaries’ ” 8 (2017)392 ITR 186 (SC) (para 15) 9 (2015)60 Taxmann.com 71 (SC) I.T.A. No.60/2014 C/W I.T.A. No.59/2014 11 15. It was argued by Shri. Aravind that the…

COMMNR.INCOME TAX vs. PIYUSH KU GUPTA

ITA/123/2005HC Orissa02 Feb 2022

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE R.K.PATTANAIK

Section 194Section 201Section 260ASection 271C

…of the Supreme Court in Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage (P) Limited v. Commissioner of Income Tax (2007) 8 SCC 463. 15. In reply, Mr. Ajay Vohra, learned Senior counsel for the Assessee referred to the decision in Japan Airlines Co. Limited v. CIT (2013) 377 ITR 372 (SC) to draw a distinction between the payment of royalty which was for the right to operate the executive lounge, and which amount was quoted by the Assessee itself, and the amount paid to use the space where lounge was operated which alone could be characterized ‘rent’. It was submitted that the intention of the parties had to be gathered…

M/S QANTAS AIRWAYS LTD.,,MUMBAI vs. ACIT(TDS)RANGE-2(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 4214/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jul 2021AY 2012-13

Section 194Section 194CSection 201

…question. 5. As regards the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Japan Airlines (supra), relied upon by the Assessing Officer, we find that the said decision is overruled by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Japan Airlines Ltd vs CIT [(2015) 377 ITR 372 (SC)]. Learned CIT(A), however, does not give up. He finds certain observations in the said decision to mean that “full and larger picture prevails over a naïve and simplistic approach and that substance of the arrangement is much more important than its form”, and uses these observations to justify his conclusions. The lack of a judicious approa…

M/S. ANGRE PORT (P) LTD.,,RATNAGIRI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,,

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1046/PUN/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.2148/Pun/2013 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 M/S. Angre Port (P) Ltd., Formerly Jaigad Ports Infrastructure (P) Ltd., Plot No.221, Midc, Mirjole, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Ratnagiri – 415612 …. Pan: Aabcj5401A Vs. The Income Tax Officer, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Ward-3, Ratnagiri

For Appellant: Shri Mihir NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Ghei

Section 143(3)Section 194

…unal in M/s. MCC PTA India Corp. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT in ITA Nos.151 & 152/Kol/2016, relating to assessment years 2011-12 and 2012-13, order dated 18.07.2018 relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Japan Airlines Co. Ltd. reported in 377 ITR 372 (SC), was in favour of assessee. He further referred to provisions of section 194-I of the Act and pointed out that obligation to deduct TDS was when the income was by way of rent; Explanation under the said section defines ‘rent’. 9 Referring to the facts of the case, the learned Authorized Representative for the assessee stated that there was…

M/S. ANGRE PORT (P) LTD.,,RATNAGIRI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,,

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2148/PUN/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.2148/Pun/2013 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 M/S. Angre Port (P) Ltd., Formerly Jaigad Ports Infrastructure (P) Ltd., Plot No.221, Midc, Mirjole, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Ratnagiri – 415612 …. Pan: Aabcj5401A Vs. The Income Tax Officer, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Ward-3, Ratnagiri

For Appellant: Shri Mihir NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Ghei

Section 143(3)Section 194

…unal in M/s. MCC PTA India Corp. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT in ITA Nos.151 & 152/Kol/2016, relating to assessment years 2011-12 and 2012-13, order dated 18.07.2018 relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Japan Airlines Co. Ltd. reported in 377 ITR 372 (SC), was in favour of assessee. He further referred to provisions of section 194-I of the Act and pointed out that obligation to deduct TDS was when the income was by way of rent; Explanation under the said section defines ‘rent’. 9 Referring to the facts of the case, the learned Authorized Representative for the assessee stated that there was…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SPICE JET LTD., GURGAON

The appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 6103/DEL/2015[2012-13 (F.Y. 2011-12)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2019

Bench: Shri G.D.Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Sh. Tarundeep Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Deepika Mittal, CIT(DR)

Section 194HSection 194JSection 201Section 201(1)

…n of the Madras High Court in Singapore Airlines (supra). This decision of the Madras High Court 13 was carried in appeal by the Revenue to the Supreme Court. By its decision reported as Japan Airlines Co. Ltd. v. CIT [2015] 60 taxmann.com 71/234 Taxman 175/377 ITR 372,the view of the Madras High Court was upheld. In the case before the Supreme Court, the issue for consideration was whether landing and take-off charges paid by the airline to the Airport Operator would be covered within the meaning of rent as provided under Section 194-I of the Act. The Apex Court while upholding the view of the Madras High Cour…

M/S MCC PTA INDIA CORPN. PVT. LTD.,PURBA MEDINIPUR vs. ACIT, CIR-59, TDS, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed

ITA 151/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Jul 2018AY 2011-2012

Section 11Section 194Section 194ISection 201(1)

…similar to the wharfage charges paid to the KPT and the assessee cannot be termed as ‘tenant’ falling under the ambit of section 194I of the Act. 15. The ld.AR referred to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Japan Airlines Co.Ltd reported in 377 ITR 372 (SC) and submitted that the Supreme court while dealing with the issue in hand considered the decisions of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of United Airlines reported in 287 ITR 281 and Singapore Airlines Ltd of Hon’ble High Court of Madras reported in 358 ITR 237. The ld. AR submits that the issue in both cases was that whether the TDS i…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DEL vs. M/S I.T.C. LTD.

ITA/77/2005HC Delhi04 Jul 2017

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

Section 194Section 201Section 260ASection 271C

…of the Supreme Court in Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage (P) Limited v. Commissioner of Income Tax (2007) 8 SCC 463. 15. In reply, Mr. Ajay Vohra, learned Senior counsel for the Assessee referred to the decision in Japan Airlines Co. Limited v. CIT (2013) 377 ITR 372 (SC) to draw a distinction between the payment of royalty which was for the right to operate the executive lounge, and which amount was quoted by the Assessee itself, and the amount paid to use the space where lounge was operated which alone could be characterized ‘rent’. It was submitted that the intention of the parties had to be gathered…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DEL vs. M/S I.T.C. LTD.

ITA/73/2005HC Delhi04 Jul 2017

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

Section 194Section 201Section 260ASection 271C

…of the Supreme Court in Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage (P) Limited v. Commissioner of Income Tax (2007) 8 SCC 463. 15. In reply, Mr. Ajay Vohra, learned Senior counsel for the Assessee referred to the decision in Japan Airlines Co. Limited v. CIT (2013) 377 ITR 372 (SC) to draw a distinction between the payment of royalty which was for the right to operate the executive lounge, and which amount was quoted by the Assessee itself, and the amount paid to use the space where lounge was operated which alone could be characterized ‘rent’. It was submitted that the intention of the parties had to be gathered…

ITO TDS 3(3), MUMBAI vs. SINGAPORE AIRLINES LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3914/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jan 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri Pawan Singh

For Respondent: Ms. Beena Santosh(DR)

Section 194ISection 201Section 201(1)Section 253Section 254(1)

…ees (PSF). The Ld. AR of the assessee argued that this ground of appeal is also covered in favour of assessee by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in assessee’s own case which was decided along with the case of Japan Airlines Company vs. CIT, reported viz 377 ITR 372 (SC). The Ld. DR for the Revenue not disputed about the factual and legal position. 9. We have gone through the order of Hon’ble Apex Court in Japan Airlines Co(supra) and seen that this ground of appeal is also squarely covered by this decision, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court held that the charges paid by International Airlines to Airport Author…

ITO (TDS) (OSD) 1(2), MUMBAI vs. EMIRATES, MUMBAI

ITA 6397/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jan 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Sh.Rajendra & Pawan Singhआयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./Ita/6397/Mum/2014,िनधा"रण अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year:2011-12 वष" Dcit (Osd) Tds-1(2), Room No.812, M/S. Emirates, Mittal Chambers, 228, K.G. Mittal, Hospital Bldg. Nariman Point, Ground Floor Vs. Charni Road Mumbai-400 021. Mumbai-400 002. Pan:Aaace 1237 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) ""या"ेप ""या"ेप/C.O/63/Mum/2016,Ay.2011-12 ""या"ेप ""या"ेप M/S. Emirates, Nariman Point Vs. Dcit (Osd) Tds-1(2), Mumbai-400 021. Mumbai-400 002. (Cross Objector) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By:Sh.Vishwas Mundhe - Dr Assessee By: Sh.Aliasger Rampurwala- Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 03.01.2017 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 03.01.2017 आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा सद",राजे" के अनुसार Challenging The Order,Dated 01/08/2014,Of The Cit(A)-14,Mumbai,The Assessing Officer (Ao)And The Assessee Have Filed Appeal/Cross Objections(Co) For The Above-Mentioned Three Ay.S,Raising Various Grounds.As The Issues Involved In The Appeal/ Co.S.Are Common,So,For The Sake Of Convenience,We Are Adjudicating Both The Matters By A Single Order.Assessee Company Is Engaged In The Business Of Operation Of Aircraft & Other Related Activities.

For Appellant: Sh.Aliasger Rampurwala- ARFor Respondent: Sh.Vishwas Mundhe - DR

Section 194Section 201Section 201(1)Section 254(1)

…iring of that premises, that it was deducting tax as per the provisions of section 194-I of the Act for the said premises.In our opinion PSF/X-Ray charges cannot be treated as rent as envisaged by section 194 I. In the case of Japan Airlines Co. Ltd. & others(377 ITR 372)the Hon’bel Apex Court has defined the word Rent as under: “The expression “rent” is given a much wider meaning u/s. 194-I than is normally known in common parlance. In the first instance, it means any payment which is made under any lease, sub-lease, tenancy. Once the payment is made under lease, sub-lease or tenancy, the nomenclature which is g…

ITO TDS 3(3), MUMBAI vs. SINGAPORE AIRLINES LTD, MUMBAI

In the result this ground of appeal is dismissed

ITA 3148/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri P.K.Bansal & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri K.K. Ved (AR)For Respondent: Shri B.S.Bist (DR)

Section 133ASection 194Section 194ISection 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 253Section 254(1)

…ees (PSF). The Ld. AR of the assessee argued that this ground of appeal is also covered in favour of assessee by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in assessee’s own case which was decided along with the case of Japan Airlines Company vs. CIT, reported viz 377 ITR 372 (SC). The Ld. DR for the Revenue not disputed about the factual and legal position. 9. We have gone through the order of Hon’ble Apex Court in Japan Airlines Co(supra) and seen that this ground of appeal is also squarely covered by this decision, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court held that the charges paid by International Airlines to Airport Author…

Japan Airlines Co. Limited v. CIT

What is Japan Airlines Co. Limited v. CIT authority for?

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Japan Airlines Co. Limited v. CIT

ORAVEL STAYS LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS ORAVEL STAYS PRIVATE LIMITED),GURUGRAM vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 6, NEW DELHI

ORAVEL STAYS LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS ORAVEL STAYS PRIVATE LIMITED),GURUGRAM vs. DCIT CIRCLE 76(1), NEW DELHI

SUMITA SINGHAL,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-17(4), NEW DELHI

R V INTERIOR PVT. LTD. ,DELHI vs. PCIT, DELHI

BENETTON INDIA P.LTD,GURGAON vs. JCIT TDS CIRCLE, GURGAON

PVR LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-76(1), NEW DELHI

PVR LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-76(1), NEW DELHI

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S BANGALORE METRO RAIL CORPORATION LTD

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S BANGALORE METRO RAIL CORPORATION LTD.,

COMMNR.INCOME TAX vs. PIYUSH KU GUPTA

M/S QANTAS AIRWAYS LTD.,,MUMBAI vs. ACIT(TDS)RANGE-2(2), MUMBAI

M/S. ANGRE PORT (P) LTD.,,RATNAGIRI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,,

M/S. ANGRE PORT (P) LTD.,,RATNAGIRI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,,

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SPICE JET LTD., GURGAON

M/S MCC PTA INDIA CORPN. PVT. LTD.,PURBA MEDINIPUR vs. ACIT, CIR-59, TDS, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DEL vs. M/S I.T.C. LTD.

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DEL vs. M/S I.T.C. LTD.

ITO TDS 3(3), MUMBAI vs. SINGAPORE AIRLINES LTD, MUMBAI

ITO (TDS) (OSD) 1(2), MUMBAI vs. EMIRATES, MUMBAI

ITO TDS 3(3), MUMBAI vs. SINGAPORE AIRLINES LTD, MUMBAI