LI & Fung India (P) Ltd. v. CIT

305 ITR 105High Court2008#20426 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 371,239 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2020.

Judgments citing LI & Fung India (P) Ltd. v. CIT

Ramnath and Co vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax

C.A. No.-002506-002509 - 2020Supreme Court05 Jun 2020

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI

Section 80

…/s Continental Construction Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-I: (1992) 195 ITR 81 (SC); Commissioner of Income Tax v. Mittal Corporation: (2005) 272 ITR 87 (Delhi); Li & Fung 19 India (P) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax: (2008) 305 ITR 105 (Delhi); Commissioner of Income Tax v. Chakiat Agencies (P) Ltd.: (2009) 314 ITR 200 (Mad); Commissioner of Income Tax v. Inchcape India (P) Ltd: (2005) 273 ITR 92 (Delhi); Central Board of Direct Taxes, New Delhi & Ors. v. Oberoi Hotels (India) Pvt. Ltd.: (1998) 231 ITR 148 (SC) and E.P.W. Da Costa (supra). 8.2. Having thus taken note of the riv…

The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Vapi Circle, Vapi vs. M/S. Mitsu Limited, Daman

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3510/AHD/2016[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Surat04 May 2020AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri Sandip Gosain & Shri O. P. Meenav. ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं././././I "नधा"र अपीलाथ" Appellant S .T.A No. ण N वष"/A Y: 1 1671/Ah 2002- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant D/2006 03 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 2 1371/Ah 2002- Assistant V. M/S. Mitsu Limited, D/2006 03 Commissioner Of 304/2, Iind Phase, Income Tax-Vapi Gidc, Vapi 396195 Circle, Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Co.No.1 2002- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant 3 84/Ahd/ 03 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of 2006 Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 4 1672/Ah 2003- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant D/2006 04 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 5 1764/Ah 2003- Assistant V. M/S. Mitsu Limited, D/2006 04 Commissioner Of 304/2, Iind Phase, Income Tax-Vapi Gidc, Vapi 396195 Circle, Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q 6 1000/Ah 2002- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant D/2016 03 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 7 3510/Ah 2000- Assistant V. M/S. Mitsu Limited, D/2016 01 Commissioner Of Page 2 Of 83 Mitsu Ltd. V. Acit- Vapi/I.T.A. No.1671-1371,Co-184,1672-1764,1614 &1000/Ahd/2006/A.Y.02-03,03-04,06-07.02-03 Income Tax-Vapi 304/2, Iind Phase, Circle, Vapi Gidc, Vapi 396195 Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q

Section 143

…e and belief of the appellant company, the aforesaid purchasers have not used the process of know-how of manufacturing products in India. 166. Learned Counsel further supported his view by placing reliance in the case of LI & Fung India (P) Ltd. v. CIT [2008] 305 ITR 105 (Delhi) wherein considering the CBDT Circular No. 700 dated 23.03.1995 it was observed that where the technical and professional services are rendered from India and are received by a foreign Government or enterprise outside India, deduction under section 80-O would be available to the person rendering the service even if the foreign recipie…

M/S. Mitsu Private Limited, Vapi vs. The ACIT, Vapi Circle, Vapi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1000/AHD/2016[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Surat04 May 2020AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Sandip Gosain & Shri O. P. Meenav. ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं././././I "नधा"र अपीलाथ" Appellant S .T.A No. ण N वष"/A Y: 1 1671/Ah 2002- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant D/2006 03 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 2 1371/Ah 2002- Assistant V. M/S. Mitsu Limited, D/2006 03 Commissioner Of 304/2, Iind Phase, Income Tax-Vapi Gidc, Vapi 396195 Circle, Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Co.No.1 2002- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant 3 84/Ahd/ 03 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of 2006 Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 4 1672/Ah 2003- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant D/2006 04 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 5 1764/Ah 2003- Assistant V. M/S. Mitsu Limited, D/2006 04 Commissioner Of 304/2, Iind Phase, Income Tax-Vapi Gidc, Vapi 396195 Circle, Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q 6 1000/Ah 2002- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant D/2016 03 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 7 3510/Ah 2000- Assistant V. M/S. Mitsu Limited, D/2016 01 Commissioner Of Page 2 Of 83 Mitsu Ltd. V. Acit- Vapi/I.T.A. No.1671-1371,Co-184,1672-1764,1614 &1000/Ahd/2006/A.Y.02-03,03-04,06-07.02-03 Income Tax-Vapi 304/2, Iind Phase, Circle, Vapi Gidc, Vapi 396195 Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q

Section 143

…e and belief of the appellant company, the aforesaid purchasers have not used the process of know-how of manufacturing products in India. 166. Learned Counsel further supported his view by placing reliance in the case of LI & Fung India (P) Ltd. v. CIT [2008] 305 ITR 105 (Delhi) wherein considering the CBDT Circular No. 700 dated 23.03.1995 it was observed that where the technical and professional services are rendered from India and are received by a foreign Government or enterprise outside India, deduction under section 80-O would be available to the person rendering the service even if the foreign recipie…

ACIT Circle 40 (1) vs. Ranjeet Singh

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 419/DEL/2007[1998-1999]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2016AY 1998-1999

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishi Assessment Year: 2007-08 Assessment Year : 2008-09 Assessment Year : 2009-10 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Dcit/Ito, Vs. Inter Globe Technology Quoteint Pvt. Ltd. Circle-11(1), Ground Floor 124, Central Wing, New Delhi. Thapar House, Janpath, New Delhi. (Pan: Aabci3241H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: S/Shriajay Vohra, Sr. Adv., Rupesh Jain & Aditya Vohra, Adv. Department By: Shri Vijay Verma, Cit( Dr) Date Of Hearing : 09 .05.2016 Date Of Pronouncement: 26 :07.2016 Order Per I.C. Sudhir:The Revenue Has Questioned First Appellate Order In All The Above Appeals Solely On The Ground That The Learned Cit(Appeals) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition (Of Rs.27,83,45,741 In Assessment Year 2007-08, Rs.90,53,50,969 In Assessment Year 2008-09, Rs. 70,35,36,948 In Assessment Year 2009-10 & Rs.98,56,91,361 In Assessment Year 2010-11) Made On Account Of Disallowance Of Deduction Claimed Under Sec. 10Aa Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961. 2 2. Heard & Considered The Arguments Advanced By The Parties In View Of Orders Of The Authorities Below, Material Available On Record & The Decisions Relied Upon.

For Appellant: S/ShriAjay Vohra, Sr. Adv., Rupesh JainFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Verma, CIT( DR)
Section 10A

…; iv) Acquire Services (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Service-tax, Delhi – 48 Taxman.com 269; v ) DCIT vs. Goenka Diamond & Jewellers Ltd. – 146 TTJ 68 (Jaipur); & vi) Oracle Software India Ltd. (2010) – 320 ITR 546 (SC); vii) LI & Fung India (P) Ltd. vs. CIT – 305 ITR 105 (Del.); viii) CIT vs. M.L. Outsourcing Services (P) Ltd. (2014) – 271 CTR 553 (Del.); ix) Vasisth Chay Vyapar Ltd. & Anr. (2011) – 333 ITR 440 (Del.); 16 6. In rejoinder, the Learned CIT(DR) reiterated that assessee is a local marketing agent doing business in India for Galileo. The services are rendered in India to Galileo. Such services are no…

LI & Fung India (P) Ltd. v. CIT (305 ITR 105) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax