JDIT(IT) v. CMA CGM SA France

27 SOT 367Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2009#17464 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 234BSection 234DSection 24Section 244A

Issues it is cited on

agency pesection 44bcredit for tdspermanent establishmentdispute resolution panelsection 44double taxationcompanysection 143(3)indiatotal incomebusiness

Judgments citing JDIT(IT) v. CMA CGM SA France

Hapag Liyod Aktiengesellschaft, Mumbai vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax -2(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is accordingly allowed for statistical purposes in the above terms

ITA 1738/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanhapag-Llyod Aktiengesellschaft Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of C/O Hapag-Lloyd India Pvt. Ltd, Income Tax International Tax 501 Satellite Gazebo, B Wing, 5Th Circle-2(2)(2) Floor, Guru Hargovindji Marg, Room No.1606, 16Th Floor, Air Andheri East, Mumbai-400993 India Building, Nariman Point, Pan – Aaach0979G Mumbai-400021 (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(5)

…urt has held that income from slot /feeder income is income from operation of ships and is an integral part of Hapag-Llyod Aktiengesellschaft the business of shipping companies. It is further stated that Hon'ble ITAT, Mumbai in the case of CMA CGM SA France [27 SOT 367 (Mum)] has also held that when income from slot arrangement is ancillary to the main business activity, the said income is covered under Article 9 of India-France Treaty. The assessee further stated that the Organization for Economic Co- operation and Development (OECD) commentary on Article 8 of Indo Germany DTAA in para 4.1 has concluded that th…

Hapag-Lloyd Aktiengesellschaft, Mumbai vs. The DCIT 2(2) (2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed as per above directions

ITA 659/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jul 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blehapag-Llyod Aktiengesellschaft V. Dcit – 2(2)(2) C/O Hapag-Lloyd India Pvt. Ltd., Air India Building 501, Satellite Gazebo, B-Wing Nariman Point 5Th Floor, Curu Hargovindji Marg Mumbai – 400 021 Andheri (E), Mumbai - 400093 Pan: Aaach0979G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ketan Ved Department By : Ms. Bharati Singh

For Appellant: Shri Ketan VedFor Respondent: Ms. Bharati Singh
Section 143(2)Section 144C(5)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Hapag-Llyod Aktiengesellschaft v. DCIT – 2(2)(2) C/o Hapag-Lloyd India Pvt. Ltd., Air India Building 501, Satellite Gazebo, B-Wing Nariman Point 5th Floor, Curu Hargovindji Marg Mumbai – 400 021 Andheri (E), Mumbai - 400093 PAN: AAACH0979G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Ketan Ved Department by : Ms. Bharati Singh Date of Hearing : 27.07.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 28.07.2022 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (AM) 1. This appeal is filed by the a…

Hapag-Lloyd Ag, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT (International Taxation)-2(2)(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed with above directions

ITA 972/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm Hapag-Lloyd Ag The Dy. Commissioner Of C/O Hapag-Lloyd India Pvt. Income-Tax (International Ltd. Taxation), Range -2(2)(2), Room No. 1606, 16 Th Floor, 403 & 404, Satellite Gazebo, Vs. A Wing, 4Th Floor, Guru Air India Building, Nariman Hargoindji Marg, Andheri Point, Mumbai-400 021 (East), Mumbai-400 093 Appellant .. Respondent Pan No. Aacfe7262L Assessee By : Shri Nishant Thakkar Ms. Jasmin Amalsadvala, Advocates, Revenue By : Shri Milind Chavan, Dr

For Appellant: Shri Nishant ThakkarFor Respondent: Shri Milind Chavan, DR
Section 143Section 234Section 270Section 270ASection 44BSection 90(2)

…tions of the ship, income from slot charters and feeder vessels are also covered for benefit. It also relied on the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Balaji Shipping (UK) Ltd (77 DTR 361) and decision of the co-ordinate Bench in CGM France [27 SOT 367 (Mum)]. The assessee also submitted that identical issue in case of the assessee has been decided by the ITAT in favour of assessee, which has been confirmed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court, where in appeal filed by the Assessing Officer is dismissed. Therefore, issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee. 05. The learned Assessing Offic…

Hapag Lloyd Ag, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) Range-2 (2) (2), Mumbai

Appeal are disposed off in the same terms

ITA 5898/MUM/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2020AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Ravish Soodita No. 218/Mum/2020 (Assessment Year: 2016-17)

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar &For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Singh, CIT,D.R
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 234BSection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 44B

…was ancillary to its main business activity of operation of ships internationally, therefore, the income generated from the same would be covered under Article 8 had relied on the order of the ITAT, Mumbai in the case of JDIT(IT) Vs. CMA CGM SA France (2009) 27 SOT 367 (Mum). Also the assessee took support of the OECD commentary on Article 8. Relying on the aforesaid judgment of the Hon‟ble High Court it was submitted by the assessee that in its case also the income from slot arrangement did form part of the income from operation of ships in international traffic. The assessee further submitted that the Hon‟ble…

Hapag-Lloyd Ag, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) RG 2(2)(2), Mumbai

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 1441/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 1441/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Hapag –Lloyd Ag Dcit (It), 2(2)(2), Room No. 1722, 17Th Floor, Air Ndia 1121 & 1122, बिधम/ Building, Nariman Point, Solitaire Corporate Park; Vs. Mumbai – 400 021. Building No. 11, 2Nd Floor, Chakala, Andheri (East), Mumbai – 400 093 स्थामीरेखासं./ जीआइआयसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aafcp5834R (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent :

For Appellant: Sh. Nishant Thakkar & Ms
Section 143(3)Section 234Section 234BSection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 44B

…ent was ancillary to its main business activity of operation of ships internationally, therefore, the income generated from the same would be covered under Article 8, relied on the order of the ITAT, Mumbai in the case of JDIT(IT) Vs. CMA CGM SA France (2009) 27 SOT 367 (Mum), as well as took support of the OECD commentary on Article 8. Thus, taking support of the aforesaid judgment of the Hon‟ble High Court it was submitted by the assessee that in its case also the income from slot arrangement did form part of the income from operation of ships in international traffic. The assessee further submitted that in its…