Kanchenjunga Sea Foods Ltd. v. CIT

325 ITR 540Supreme Court of India2010#3577 most cited

What is Kanchenjunga Sea Foods Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Income is received for tax purposes at the place where the recipient first controls it. For non-resident reinsurers, this control over insurance premiums is often gained when apportioned by Indian insurers under regulations.

33

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2022.

Also referred to as

Kanchenjunga Sea Foods Ltd · CIT · 325 ITR 540 · SC · income receipt · place of control · non-resident · Indian insurer · insurance premium · taxability

Judgments citing Kanchenjunga Sea Foods Ltd. v. CIT

Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue for the Assessment year

ITA 1356/CHNY/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1356/Chny/2013, 1626/Chny/2011 & 2310/Chny/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2005-06 & 2010-11 M/S. Royal Sundaram Alliance Assistant Commissioner Of Insurance Company Limited V. Income Tax, “Sundaram Towers” Large Tax Payer Unit, 45 & 46, Whites Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 002. [Pan: Aabcr-7106-G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1628, 1629 & 1630/Chny/2011 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09 M/S. Royal Sundaram Alliance Deputy Commissioner Of Insurance Company Limited V. Income Tax, “Sundaram Towers” Large Tax Payer Unit, 45 & 46, Whites Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 002. [Pan: Aabcr-7106-G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1666/Chny/2011 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2005-06 Assistant Commissioner Of Income M/S. Royal Sundaram Alliance Tax, V. Insurance Company Limited Large Tax Payer Unit, “Sundaram Towers” Chennai. 45 & 46, Whites Road, Chennai – 600 002. [Pan: Aabcr-7106-G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri. Sandeep Bagmar, Advocate

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 195Section 3Section 40Section 5

…f reinsurance premium by the assessee to the non-resident reinsurers without deduction of TDS u/s 195 of the Act shall be taxable in the hands of the Indian insurers based on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kanchanganga Sea Foods Limited (325 ITR 540) The facts of the above said case of the Honorable Supreme Court is being compared with the present case as under: Sl Rule of the Supreme Court Facts of the assessee's case No in the case of Kanchanganga Sea Food Limited 1 A plain reading of the In the instant case, the provisions of the Indian reinsurance premium has arisen Income Tax Act makes…

Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Company Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

ITA 1350/CHNY/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha(अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) S.

For Appellant: Mr. Percy J. PardiwallaFor Respondent: Mr. M.Swaminathan, Sr.Standing
Section 195Section 3Section 40Section 5

…pt of income in India attracts tax, irrespective of whether income accrued or arose in India or outside India. The learned Sr. Standing Counsel further referring to decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kanchenjunga Sea Foods Ltd Vs. CIT (2010) 325 ITR 540 (SC) submitted that Hon'ble Supreme Court reiterated that income is received at a place where recipient first controls it. In the facts of the present case, non- resident reinsurer was held to have gained control over specific percentage in insurance premium only when it was apportioned ITA Nos. 40/Chny/2009, 1759 & 1676/Chny/2011, 1366/Chny/2013…

DCIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Co. Ltd., Chennai

ITA 1759/CHNY/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha(अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) S.

For Appellant: Mr. Percy J. PardiwallaFor Respondent: Mr. M.Swaminathan, Sr.Standing
Section 195Section 3Section 40Section 5

…pt of income in India attracts tax, irrespective of whether income accrued or arose in India or outside India. The learned Sr. Standing Counsel further referring to decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kanchenjunga Sea Foods Ltd Vs. CIT (2010) 325 ITR 540 (SC) submitted that Hon'ble Supreme Court reiterated that income is received at a place where recipient first controls it. In the facts of the present case, non- resident reinsurer was held to have gained control over specific percentage in insurance premium only when it was apportioned ITA Nos. 40/Chny/2009, 1759 & 1676/Chny/2011, 1366/Chny/2013…

DCIT, Chennai vs. M/S. United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue for the assessment years 2003-04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07, 2008-09,

ITA 1693/CHNY/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1673, 1688, 1689, 1691/Chny/2011 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2003-04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07 Assistant Commissioner Of Income M/S. United India Insurance Co. Tax, V. Ltd., Large Tax Payer Unit, 24, Whites Road, Chennai – Chennai. 600 014. [Pan: Aaacu-5552-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos: 1693/Chny/2011, 36/Chny/2014 & 696/Chny/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S. United India Insurance Co. Tax, V. Ltd., Large Tax Payer Unit, 24, Whites Road, Chennai – Chennai. 600 014. [Pan: Aaacu-5552-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri. S. Sundararaman, Ca Department Represented By : Shri. M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel & Ms. V. Pushpa, Jr. Standing Counsel सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 10.08.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.08.2022 आदेश /O R D E R

Section 195Section 195(1)Section 40Section 5(2)(b)

…f reinsurance premium by the assessee to the non-resident reinsurers without deduction of TDS u/s 195 of the Act shall be taxable in the hands of the Indian insurers based on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kanchanganga Sea Foods Limited (325 ITR 540) The facts of the above said case of the Honorable Supreme Court is being compared with the present case as under: Sl Rule of the Supreme Court Facts of the assessee's case No in the case of Kanchanganga Sea Food Limited 1 A plain reading of the In the instant case, the provisions of the Indian reinsurance premium has arisen Income Tax Act makes…

DCIT, Chennai vs. M/S. United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue for the assessment years 2003-04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07, 2008-09,

ITA 1691/CHNY/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1673, 1688, 1689, 1691/Chny/2011 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2003-04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07 Assistant Commissioner Of Income M/S. United India Insurance Co. Tax, V. Ltd., Large Tax Payer Unit, 24, Whites Road, Chennai – Chennai. 600 014. [Pan: Aaacu-5552-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos: 1693/Chny/2011, 36/Chny/2014 & 696/Chny/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S. United India Insurance Co. Tax, V. Ltd., Large Tax Payer Unit, 24, Whites Road, Chennai – Chennai. 600 014. [Pan: Aaacu-5552-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri. S. Sundararaman, Ca Department Represented By : Shri. M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel & Ms. V. Pushpa, Jr. Standing Counsel सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 10.08.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.08.2022 आदेश /O R D E R

Section 195Section 195(1)Section 40Section 5(2)(b)

…f reinsurance premium by the assessee to the non-resident reinsurers without deduction of TDS u/s 195 of the Act shall be taxable in the hands of the Indian insurers based on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kanchanganga Sea Foods Limited (325 ITR 540) The facts of the above said case of the Honorable Supreme Court is being compared with the present case as under: Sl Rule of the Supreme Court Facts of the assessee's case No in the case of Kanchanganga Sea Food Limited 1 A plain reading of the In the instant case, the provisions of the Indian reinsurance premium has arisen Income Tax Act makes…

DCIT, Chennai vs. M/S. United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue for the assessment years 2003-04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07, 2008-09,

ITA 1689/CHNY/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1673, 1688, 1689, 1691/Chny/2011 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2003-04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07 Assistant Commissioner Of Income M/S. United India Insurance Co. Tax, V. Ltd., Large Tax Payer Unit, 24, Whites Road, Chennai – Chennai. 600 014. [Pan: Aaacu-5552-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos: 1693/Chny/2011, 36/Chny/2014 & 696/Chny/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S. United India Insurance Co. Tax, V. Ltd., Large Tax Payer Unit, 24, Whites Road, Chennai – Chennai. 600 014. [Pan: Aaacu-5552-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri. S. Sundararaman, Ca Department Represented By : Shri. M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel & Ms. V. Pushpa, Jr. Standing Counsel सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 10.08.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.08.2022 आदेश /O R D E R

Section 195Section 195(1)Section 40Section 5(2)(b)

…f reinsurance premium by the assessee to the non-resident reinsurers without deduction of TDS u/s 195 of the Act shall be taxable in the hands of the Indian insurers based on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kanchanganga Sea Foods Limited (325 ITR 540) The facts of the above said case of the Honorable Supreme Court is being compared with the present case as under: Sl Rule of the Supreme Court Facts of the assessee's case No in the case of Kanchanganga Sea Food Limited 1 A plain reading of the In the instant case, the provisions of the Indian reinsurance premium has arisen Income Tax Act makes…

DCIT, Chennai vs. M/S. United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue for the assessment years 2003-04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07, 2008-09,

ITA 1688/CHNY/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1673, 1688, 1689, 1691/Chny/2011 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2003-04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07 Assistant Commissioner Of Income M/S. United India Insurance Co. Tax, V. Ltd., Large Tax Payer Unit, 24, Whites Road, Chennai – Chennai. 600 014. [Pan: Aaacu-5552-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos: 1693/Chny/2011, 36/Chny/2014 & 696/Chny/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S. United India Insurance Co. Tax, V. Ltd., Large Tax Payer Unit, 24, Whites Road, Chennai – Chennai. 600 014. [Pan: Aaacu-5552-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri. S. Sundararaman, Ca Department Represented By : Shri. M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel & Ms. V. Pushpa, Jr. Standing Counsel सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 10.08.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.08.2022 आदेश /O R D E R

Section 195Section 195(1)Section 40Section 5(2)(b)

…f reinsurance premium by the assessee to the non-resident reinsurers without deduction of TDS u/s 195 of the Act shall be taxable in the hands of the Indian insurers based on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kanchanganga Sea Foods Limited (325 ITR 540) The facts of the above said case of the Honorable Supreme Court is being compared with the present case as under: Sl Rule of the Supreme Court Facts of the assessee's case No in the case of Kanchanganga Sea Food Limited 1 A plain reading of the In the instant case, the provisions of the Indian reinsurance premium has arisen Income Tax Act makes…

DCIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Co. Ltd., Chennai

ITA 1676/CHNY/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha(अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) S.

For Appellant: Mr. Percy J. PardiwallaFor Respondent: Mr. M.Swaminathan, Sr.Standing
Section 195Section 3Section 40Section 5

…pt of income in India attracts tax, irrespective of whether income accrued or arose in India or outside India. The learned Sr. Standing Counsel further referring to decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kanchenjunga Sea Foods Ltd Vs. CIT (2010) 325 ITR 540 (SC) submitted that Hon'ble Supreme Court reiterated that income is received at a place where recipient first controls it. In the facts of the present case, non- resident reinsurer was held to have gained control over specific percentage in insurance premium only when it was apportioned ITA Nos. 40/Chny/2009, 1759 & 1676/Chny/2011, 1366/Chny/2013…

Sri. B. Rudragouda, Bellary vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1, Bellary

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 315/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Apr 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri Chythanya K.K., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 37Section 37(1)

…itation for mining area. The mining license of assessee is classified under Category A by the MC. The sale proceeds retained by MC would constitute diversion of income overriding title. As held by the Supreme Court in Kahchanganga Sea Foods Ltd. v. CIT [2010] 325 ITR 540 (SC), to constitute ‘income’, the recipient must have control over it. He also relied on various judicial pronouncements as follows:- (1) Dy. CIT v. Dipesh Chandak [2007] 10 TTJ (Pat) 366 (2) CIT v. Sitaldas Tirathdas [1961] 41 ITR 367 (SC) (3) CIT v. United Breweries Ltd. [2010] 321 ITR 547 (Karn) ITA Nos.314 & 315/Bang/2020 Page 20 of 70 (4)…

Sri. B. Rudragouda, Bellary vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1, Bellary

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 314/BANG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Apr 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri Chythanya K.K., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 37Section 37(1)

…itation for mining area. The mining license of assessee is classified under Category A by the MC. The sale proceeds retained by MC would constitute diversion of income overriding title. As held by the Supreme Court in Kahchanganga Sea Foods Ltd. v. CIT [2010] 325 ITR 540 (SC), to constitute ‘income’, the recipient must have control over it. He also relied on various judicial pronouncements as follows:- (1) Dy. CIT v. Dipesh Chandak [2007] 10 TTJ (Pat) 366 (2) CIT v. Sitaldas Tirathdas [1961] 41 ITR 367 (SC) (3) CIT v. United Breweries Ltd. [2010] 321 ITR 547 (Karn) ITA Nos.314 & 315/Bang/2020 Page 20 of 70 (4)…

M/S Prestige Estates Projects Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-18(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 813/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Mar 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Vp & Shri Chandra Poojari, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Smt.R.Premi, JCIT-DR
Section 191Section 194Section 201Section 201(1)Section 206ASection 4

…om definite sources”. 29 M/s.Prestige Estates Projects Limited. 3.56 The learned AR submitted that to constitute an income the assessee must have control of the use of the impugned receipt / sum. The Supreme Court in Kanchanganga Sea Foods Ltd. v. CIT (2010) 325 ITR 540 observed “It is trite to say that to constitute income the recipient must have control over it.” The amount received must be at the disposal of the assessee (land owner / seller in the present case). Only on satisfaction of this essential requirement, a receipt could be regarded as ‘income’ chargeable to tax. In the instant case, the assessee has…

M/S. Gujarat Cricket Association, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. CIT, Exemptions, Circle-1, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2589/AHD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh&Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2589/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15) M/S. Gujarat Cricket Dcit, बनाम/ Exemptions, Circle-1, Association Vs. Ahmedabad Iind Floor, Akshar Arcade, Opp. Memnagar Fire Station, Nr. Vijay Char Rasta, Ahmedabad- 380015 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaa Ag1 205 C .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Aparna Agarwal, CIT DRFor Respondent: 20/03/2019
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 13(8)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 2(24)Section 234Section 80G(5)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘A’अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER &Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2589/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15) M/s. Gujarat Cricket DCIT, बनाम/ Exemptions, Circle-1, Association Vs. Ahmedabad IInd Floor, Akshar Arcade, Opp. Memnagar Fire Station, Nr. Vijay Char Rasta, Ahmedabad- 380015 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAA AG1 205 C .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) M. K. Patel, AR अपीलाथ"ओरसे/Appellant by : Aparna Agarwal, CIT DR ""यथ"क"ओर…

Johnson Matthey Public Ltd. Company, Gurgaon vs. DCIT (International Taxation), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part for statistical purpose

ITA 1143/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Dec 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.D.Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri K.N. Chary

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 234BSection 271(1)(C)Section 9(1)(vii)

…at the loan transaction took place in India, it is not open for the assessee to contend that no income accrued to them in India. We are fortified in our this opinion, by the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Kanchanganga Sea Foods Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT [2010] 325 ITR 540 (SC) where the Hon’ble Court held that in cases of the receipts created by legal fiction under section ITA No.-1143/Del/2016 5(2) of the Act, there is no escape from the conclusion that the income earned by the non-resident company had received the same in India. 10. In these circumstances, in view of the legal fiction followed by the Hon’ble S…