Mis Yahoo India Pvt Ltd. v. DCIT (ITAT Mumbai), Standard Chartered Bank

307 ITR 59High Court2008#1254 most cited
90

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Mis Yahoo India Pvt Ltd v DCIT · 307 ITR 59 · Section 9(1)(vi) · Section 9(1)(vii) · use of equipment · right to use · control and possession · royalty income · income deemed to accrue in India · Authority for Advance Rulings

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 9(1)(vi)Section 12Section 143(2)Section 148Section 148A(b)

Issues it is cited on

section 206ause of equipmentsection 206aasection 9(2)section 9(l)(vii)section 9(1)(vii)(b)section 9(l)section 9(1)(vi)section 9(l)(vi)section 90(2)section 44bbsection 195(2)

Judgments citing Mis Yahoo India Pvt Ltd. v. DCIT (ITAT Mumbai), Standard Chartered Bank

Inmarsat Solutions Bv, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle Int. Tax. 2(1) (1), New Delhi

In the result, appeals are partly allowed

ITA 1883/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Oct 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2019-22 With Assessment Year: 2020-21. Inmarsat Solutions Bv, Vs. Acit, Mumbai, Circle- Intl. Tax. 2(1)(1), 14Th Floor, The Ruby 29 New Delhi Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar (West), Mumbai, Maharashtra Pan :Aacci9974L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 9(1)(vi)

…nder :- “10. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that the material facts of the present case are largely identical to the facts as considered by AAR in the ruling in the case of ISRO Satellite Centre(2008) 307 ITR 59 (AAR). We note that the reasoning and conclusion on facts similar to the facts in the present proceedings with ISRO which has been followed after a detailed discussion and in fact extracted by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co. Ltd. (2011) 332 ITR 340(Del.). We note that no arguments have been advance…

Inmarsat Solutions Bv, Maharashtra vs. ACIT (International Taxation) Circle 2(1)(1)-Delhi, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 1717/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannua N D Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti Sathe, &
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 9(1)(vi)

…nder :- “10. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that the material facts of the present case are largely identical to the facts as considered by AAR in the ruling in the case of ISRO Satellite Centre(2008) 307 ITR 59 (AAR). We note that the reasoning and conclusion on facts similar to the facts in the present proceedings with ISRO which has been followed after a detailed discussion and in fact extracted by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co. Ltd. (2011) 332 ITR 340(Del.). We note that no arguments have been advance…

M/S. Telecom Italia Sparkle Singapore Pte. Limited, Singapore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation- Circle 2(1), Bangalore

In the result, all the three appeals filed by assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 580/BANG/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(It)A Nos. 579 & 580/Bang/2020 Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2010-11 M/S. Telecom Italia The Deputy Sparkle Singapore Pte. Commissioner Of Ltd., Income Tax, 23-01, Suntec Tower (International Four, Taxation), 6 Temasek Boulevard, Vs. Circle – 2(1), Singapore – 038986 Bangalore. Pan: Aagct6780P Appellant Respondent & It(It)A No. 1138/Bang/2022 Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Ti Sparkle The Deputy Singapore Pte. Ltd., Commissioner Of 23-01, Suntec Tower Income Tax, Four, (International 6 Temasek Boulevard, Taxation), Singapore – 038986 Circle – 2(2), Vs. Pan: Aagct6780P Bangalore. Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Nischal .B, Addl. CIT (DR)
Section 148Section 195Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vi)

…n following decisions:  Decision of Authority For Advance Ruling(hereinafter referred to as AAR), in case of Cable & Wireless Networks India(P.)Ltd., In re, reported in (2009) 182 Taxman 76  Decision of AAR in case of ISRO Satellite Centre reported in 2008) 307 ITR 59  Decision of AAR in case of Dell International Services (India) P. Ltd.In.re. reported in (2008) 172 Taxman 418. 9.2.11 The above decisions, lay down that, in order to satisfy 'use or right to use', the control and possession of right, property or information should be with payer. 9.2.12 In the decision of Authority For Advance Ruling, in case of…

M/S. Telecom Italia Sparkle Singapore Pte. Limited, Singapore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation- Circle 2(1), Bangalore

In the result, all the three appeals filed by assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 579/BANG/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Aug 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(It)A Nos. 579 & 580/Bang/2020 Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2010-11 M/S. Telecom Italia The Deputy Sparkle Singapore Pte. Commissioner Of Ltd., Income Tax, 23-01, Suntec Tower (International Four, Taxation), 6 Temasek Boulevard, Vs. Circle – 2(1), Singapore – 038986 Bangalore. Pan: Aagct6780P Appellant Respondent & It(It)A No. 1138/Bang/2022 Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Ti Sparkle The Deputy Singapore Pte. Ltd., Commissioner Of 23-01, Suntec Tower Income Tax, Four, (International 6 Temasek Boulevard, Taxation), Singapore – 038986 Circle – 2(2), Vs. Pan: Aagct6780P Bangalore. Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Nischal .B, Addl. CIT (DR)
Section 148Section 195Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vi)

…n following decisions:  Decision of Authority For Advance Ruling(hereinafter referred to as AAR), in case of Cable & Wireless Networks India(P.)Ltd., In re, reported in (2009) 182 Taxman 76  Decision of AAR in case of ISRO Satellite Centre reported in 2008) 307 ITR 59  Decision of AAR in case of Dell International Services (India) P. Ltd.In.re. reported in (2008) 172 Taxman 418. 9.2.11 The above decisions, lay down that, in order to satisfy 'use or right to use', the control and possession of right, property or information should be with payer. 9.2.12 In the decision of Authority For Advance Ruling, in case of…

Telefonica De Espana Sa, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation), Circle-2(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee stands partly allowed as indicated hereinabove

ITA 180/BANG/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(It)A Nos. 2657/Bang/2019, 180/Bang/2021 & 817/Bang/2022 Assessment Years : 2010-11 To 2012-13 M/S. Telefonica Depreciation Espana Sa, C/O. Bsr & Co.Llp, 3Rd Floor, Pebble The Acit(It)/Dcit(It), Beach, Circle – 2(2), Embassy Golf Links Bangalore. Business Park, Vs. Off Intermediate Ring Road, Bangalore – 560 071. Pan: Aahct0411G Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sharath Rao, Ca Revenue By : Shri D.K. Mishra, Cit Dr

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, CIT DR
Section 147Section 148Section 201Section 234ASection 9(1)(vi)

…n following decisions:  Decision of Authority For Advance Ruling(hereinafter referred to as AAR), in case of Cable & Wireless Networks India(P.)Ltd., In re, reported in (2009) 182 Taxman 76  Decision of AAR in case of ISRO Satellite Centre reported in 2008) 307 ITR 59  Decision of AAR in case of Dell International Services (India) P. Ltd.In.re. reported in (2008) 172 Taxman 418. 5.2.11 The above decisions, lay down that, in order to satisfy 'use or right to use', the control and possession of right, property or information should be with payer. 5.2.12 In the decision of Authority For Advance Ruling, in case of…

M/S. Telefonica De Espana Sa, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, (International Taxation), Circle- 2(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee stands partly allowed as indicated hereinabove

ITA 2657/BANG/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(It)A Nos. 2657/Bang/2019, 180/Bang/2021 & 817/Bang/2022 Assessment Years : 2010-11 To 2012-13 M/S. Telefonica Depreciation Espana Sa, C/O. Bsr & Co.Llp, 3Rd Floor, Pebble The Acit(It)/Dcit(It), Beach, Circle – 2(2), Embassy Golf Links Bangalore. Business Park, Vs. Off Intermediate Ring Road, Bangalore – 560 071. Pan: Aahct0411G Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sharath Rao, Ca Revenue By : Shri D.K. Mishra, Cit Dr

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, CIT DR
Section 147Section 148Section 201Section 234ASection 9(1)(vi)

…n following decisions:  Decision of Authority For Advance Ruling(hereinafter referred to as AAR), in case of Cable & Wireless Networks India(P.)Ltd., In re, reported in (2009) 182 Taxman 76  Decision of AAR in case of ISRO Satellite Centre reported in 2008) 307 ITR 59  Decision of AAR in case of Dell International Services (India) P. Ltd.In.re. reported in (2008) 172 Taxman 418. 5.2.11 The above decisions, lay down that, in order to satisfy 'use or right to use', the control and possession of right, property or information should be with payer. 5.2.12 In the decision of Authority For Advance Ruling, in case of…

M/S. Ariba Inc., Gurgaon vs. ADIT, New Delhi

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee stand partly

ITA 1470/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2022AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Sinha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 115ASection 182Section 234BSection 28Section 44DSection 9(1)

…ompany for uplinking and down linking of TV signals will not be royalty for use of transponders inside the satellite. 26. Subsequently, the AAR adopted the position laid down in Asia Satellite (supra) in the case of ISRO Satellite Centre (ISAC), in re (2008) 307 ITR 59, wherein, it was held that for equipment royalty to arise, the payer needs to have control over the equipment. If the payer merely receives a service without control or possession of the equipment, no royalty can arise. 27. To the same effect are the following decisions: • Director of Income-tax v. New Skies Satellite BY (2016) 382 ITR 114 (Del…

M/S. Ariba Inc., Gurgaon vs. ADIT, New Delhi

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee stand partly

ITA 1469/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2022AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Sinha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 115ASection 182Section 234BSection 28Section 44DSection 9(1)

…ompany for uplinking and down linking of TV signals will not be royalty for use of transponders inside the satellite. 26. Subsequently, the AAR adopted the position laid down in Asia Satellite (supra) in the case of ISRO Satellite Centre (ISAC), in re (2008) 307 ITR 59, wherein, it was held that for equipment royalty to arise, the payer needs to have control over the equipment. If the payer merely receives a service without control or possession of the equipment, no royalty can arise. 27. To the same effect are the following decisions: • Director of Income-tax v. New Skies Satellite BY (2016) 382 ITR 114 (Del…

Ariba Inc., New Delhi vs. ADIT, New Delhi

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee stand partly

ITA 1538/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2022AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Sinha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 115ASection 182Section 234BSection 28Section 44DSection 9(1)

…ompany for uplinking and down linking of TV signals will not be royalty for use of transponders inside the satellite. 26. Subsequently, the AAR adopted the position laid down in Asia Satellite (supra) in the case of ISRO Satellite Centre (ISAC), in re (2008) 307 ITR 59, wherein, it was held that for equipment royalty to arise, the payer needs to have control over the equipment. If the payer merely receives a service without control or possession of the equipment, no royalty can arise. 27. To the same effect are the following decisions: • Director of Income-tax v. New Skies Satellite BY (2016) 382 ITR 114 (Del…

Ariba Inc., New Delhi vs. ADIT, New Delhi

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee stand partly

ITA 3923/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2022AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Sinha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 115ASection 182Section 234BSection 28Section 44DSection 9(1)

…ompany for uplinking and down linking of TV signals will not be royalty for use of transponders inside the satellite. 26. Subsequently, the AAR adopted the position laid down in Asia Satellite (supra) in the case of ISRO Satellite Centre (ISAC), in re (2008) 307 ITR 59, wherein, it was held that for equipment royalty to arise, the payer needs to have control over the equipment. If the payer merely receives a service without control or possession of the equipment, no royalty can arise. 27. To the same effect are the following decisions: • Director of Income-tax v. New Skies Satellite BY (2016) 382 ITR 114 (Del…

Ariba Inc., New Delhi vs. ADIT, New Delhi

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee stand partly

ITA 6090/DEL/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2022AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Sinha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 115ASection 182Section 234BSection 28Section 44DSection 9(1)

…ompany for uplinking and down linking of TV signals will not be royalty for use of transponders inside the satellite. 26. Subsequently, the AAR adopted the position laid down in Asia Satellite (supra) in the case of ISRO Satellite Centre (ISAC), in re (2008) 307 ITR 59, wherein, it was held that for equipment royalty to arise, the payer needs to have control over the equipment. If the payer merely receives a service without control or possession of the equipment, no royalty can arise. 27. To the same effect are the following decisions: • Director of Income-tax v. New Skies Satellite BY (2016) 382 ITR 114 (Del…

Ariba Inc, New Delhi vs. ADIT (Intl Taxation), New Delhi

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee stand partly

ITA 4584/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2022AY 2006-07
For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Sinha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 115ASection 182Section 234BSection 28Section 44DSection 9(1)

…ompany for uplinking and down linking of TV signals will not be royalty for use of transponders inside the satellite. 26. Subsequently, the AAR adopted the position laid down in Asia Satellite (supra) in the case of ISRO Satellite Centre (ISAC), in re (2008) 307 ITR 59, wherein, it was held that for equipment royalty to arise, the payer needs to have control over the equipment. If the payer merely receives a service without control or possession of the equipment, no royalty can arise. 27. To the same effect are the following decisions: • Director of Income-tax v. New Skies Satellite BY (2016) 382 ITR 114 (Del…

Ariba Inc, New Delhi vs. ADIT (Intl Taxation), New Delhi

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee stand partly

ITA 4583/DEL/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2022AY 2005-06
For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Sinha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 115ASection 182Section 234BSection 28Section 44DSection 9(1)

…ompany for uplinking and down linking of TV signals will not be royalty for use of transponders inside the satellite. 26. Subsequently, the AAR adopted the position laid down in Asia Satellite (supra) in the case of ISRO Satellite Centre (ISAC), in re (2008) 307 ITR 59, wherein, it was held that for equipment royalty to arise, the payer needs to have control over the equipment. If the payer merely receives a service without control or possession of the equipment, no royalty can arise. 27. To the same effect are the following decisions: • Director of Income-tax v. New Skies Satellite BY (2016) 382 ITR 114 (Del…

Ariba Inc, New Delhi vs. ADIT (Intl Taxation), New Delhi

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee stand partly

ITA 4582/DEL/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2022AY 2004-05
For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Sinha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 115ASection 182Section 234BSection 28Section 44DSection 9(1)

…ompany for uplinking and down linking of TV signals will not be royalty for use of transponders inside the satellite. 26. Subsequently, the AAR adopted the position laid down in Asia Satellite (supra) in the case of ISRO Satellite Centre (ISAC), in re (2008) 307 ITR 59, wherein, it was held that for equipment royalty to arise, the payer needs to have control over the equipment. If the payer merely receives a service without control or possession of the equipment, no royalty can arise. 27. To the same effect are the following decisions: • Director of Income-tax v. New Skies Satellite BY (2016) 382 ITR 114 (Del…

Immarsat Global Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 2(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result the issue under consideration is remitted back to the file of Assessing Officer for statistical purpose and ground raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 626/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleinmarsat Global Limited V. Dcit (It) – 2(2)(1) Ernst & Young Llp Room No. 1722, 17Th Floor 14Th Floor, The Ruby Air India Building, Nariman Point 29 Senapati Bapat Marg Mumbai – 400021 Dadar (W), Mumbai – 400028 Pan: Aaaci6098K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Aarati Sathe Department By : Ms. Bharati Singh

For Appellant: Ms. Aarati SatheFor Respondent: Ms. Bharati Singh
Section 143(2)Section 144C(5)

…under: "10. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that the material facts of the present case are largely identical to the facts as considered by AAR in the ruling in the case of ISRO Satellite Centre (2008) 307 ITR 59 (AAR). We note that the reasoning and conclusion on facts similar to the facts in the present proceedings with ISRO which has been followed after detailed discussion and in fact extracted by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co. Ltd. (2011) 332 ITR 340 (Del). We note that no argument have been advanced by the Re…

Immarsat Global Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT (International Taxation) Range-2(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1031/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2022AY 2017-18
Section 143(3)Section 9(1)(vi)

…der :- “10. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that the material facts of the present case are largely identical to the facts as considered by AAR in the ruling in the case of ISRO Satellite Centre(2008) 307 ITR 59 (AAR). We note that the reasoning and conclusion on facts similar to the facts in the present proceedings with ISRO which has been followed after a detailed discussion and in fact extracted by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co. Ltd. (2011) 332 ITR 340(Del.). We note that no arguments have been advance…

M/S. Madura Coats Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax., (International Transaction), Circle- 1(2), Bangalore

In the result, appeals filed by assessee for A

ITA 1345/BANG/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 May 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy Sit(It)A Nos. 1344 & 1345/Bang/2019 Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18 M/S. Madura Coats Pvt. The Deputy Ltd., Commissioner Of 7Th Floor, Jupiter Income Tax Prestige Technology (International Park, Vs. Taxation), Outer Ring Road, Circle – 1(2), Bangalore – 560 103. Bangalore. Pan: Aabcm8297K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Ajay Rotti, Ca : Shri Shehnawaz Ul Rahaman, Revenue By Addl. Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 13-04-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 31-05-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeals Are Filed By Assessee Against Order Dated 30.03.2019 Passed By Ld.Cit(A)-12, Bangalore For A.Ys. 2016-17 & 2017-18. It Is Submitted That The Issues Alleged By Assessee In Both These Years Are Identical & On Similar Facts. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are As Under: 2.1 Madura Coats Pvt Ltd (Mcpl) Is An Indian Company Carrying On The Business As Manufacturer & Merchant Of Sewing Threads & Other Goods, Possesses The Requisite Expertise & Experience By Virtue Of Having Several Qualified Personnel In Its Employment. During The Course Of Verification Conducted Us

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Rotti, CA
Section 195Section 201(1)

…n following decisions:  Decision of Authority For Advance Ruling(hereinafter referred to as AAR), in case of Cable & Wireless Networks India(P.)Ltd., In re, reported in (2009) 182 Taxman 76  Decision of AAR in case of ISRO Satellite Centre reported in 2008) 307 ITR 59  Decision of AAR in case of Dell International Services (India) P. Ltd.In.re. reported in (2008) 172 Taxman 418. The above decisions, lay down that, in order to satisfy 'use or right to use', the control and possession of right, property or information should be with payer. 40. In the decision of Authority For Advance Ruling, in case of Cable & W…

M/S. Madura Coats Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax., (International Transaction), Circle- 1(2), Bangalore

In the result, appeals filed by assessee for A

ITA 1344/BANG/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 May 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy Sit(It)A Nos. 1344 & 1345/Bang/2019 Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18 M/S. Madura Coats Pvt. The Deputy Ltd., Commissioner Of 7Th Floor, Jupiter Income Tax Prestige Technology (International Park, Vs. Taxation), Outer Ring Road, Circle – 1(2), Bangalore – 560 103. Bangalore. Pan: Aabcm8297K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Ajay Rotti, Ca : Shri Shehnawaz Ul Rahaman, Revenue By Addl. Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 13-04-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 31-05-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeals Are Filed By Assessee Against Order Dated 30.03.2019 Passed By Ld.Cit(A)-12, Bangalore For A.Ys. 2016-17 & 2017-18. It Is Submitted That The Issues Alleged By Assessee In Both These Years Are Identical & On Similar Facts. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are As Under: 2.1 Madura Coats Pvt Ltd (Mcpl) Is An Indian Company Carrying On The Business As Manufacturer & Merchant Of Sewing Threads & Other Goods, Possesses The Requisite Expertise & Experience By Virtue Of Having Several Qualified Personnel In Its Employment. During The Course Of Verification Conducted Us

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Rotti, CA
Section 195Section 201(1)

…n following decisions:  Decision of Authority For Advance Ruling(hereinafter referred to as AAR), in case of Cable & Wireless Networks India(P.)Ltd., In re, reported in (2009) 182 Taxman 76  Decision of AAR in case of ISRO Satellite Centre reported in 2008) 307 ITR 59  Decision of AAR in case of Dell International Services (India) P. Ltd.In.re. reported in (2008) 172 Taxman 418. The above decisions, lay down that, in order to satisfy 'use or right to use', the control and possession of right, property or information should be with payer. 40. In the decision of Authority For Advance Ruling, in case of Cable & W…

Vodafone Idea Limited, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-14(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeals and cross objections of the assessee for the Asst Years 2002-03 and 2003-04 are allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1919/HYD/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Ronak DoshiFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar(CIT-DR)
Section 133ASection 194HSection 194JSection 201(1)Section 9

…id the monthly recurring charges to BT for the "use" of any such equipment. It was in this context that the AAR opined that it cannot be called as a use of the equipment. Similar views have been taken in the case of Isro Satellite Centre (ISAC), In re (2008) (307 ITR 59) (AAR) and Cable and Wireless Networks India P. Ltd., In re (2009) (315 ITR 72) (AAR). 3.5.13. Attention is also invited to the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. and Another vs. Union of India and Others (2006) (282 ITR 273) (SC). This judgment arose under the Service Tax and Sales Tax wherein one of the questi…

Vodafone Idea Limited, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-14(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeals and cross objections of the assessee for the Asst Years 2002-03 and 2003-04 are allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1918/HYD/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 May 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Ronak DoshiFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar(CIT-DR)
Section 133ASection 194HSection 194JSection 201(1)Section 9

…id the monthly recurring charges to BT for the "use" of any such equipment. It was in this context that the AAR opined that it cannot be called as a use of the equipment. Similar views have been taken in the case of Isro Satellite Centre (ISAC), In re (2008) (307 ITR 59) (AAR) and Cable and Wireless Networks India P. Ltd., In re (2009) (315 ITR 72) (AAR). 3.5.13. Attention is also invited to the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. and Another vs. Union of India and Others (2006) (282 ITR 273) (SC). This judgment arose under the Service Tax and Sales Tax wherein one of the questi…