MS Srinivasa Naicker v. Income Tax Officer

292 ITR 482Reported decision#6961 most cited

What is MS Srinivasa Naicker v. Income Tax Officer authority for?

Profits from the offshore supply of equipment do not accrue in India. A permanent establishment (PE) for installation and commissioning arises only after the supply of equipment.

16

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2019.

Also referred to as

M S Srinivasa Naicker v. Income Tax Officer · CIT vs. Hyundai Industries Ltd · 292 ITR 482 · offshore supply of equipment · permanent establishment · installation and commissioning · income accrual · Section 9(1)(i)

Judgments citing MS Srinivasa Naicker v. Income Tax Officer

DCIT (It) 2(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Daimler Ag, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 183/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri G. Manjunatha, Am Dcit(It)-2(1)(2), Vs. M/S. Daimler Ag Room No.1612, 16Th Floor, C/O. Srbc & Associates Llp, Chartered Accountants, 14 Th Air India Building, Nariman Point Floor, The Ruby, 29, Senapati Mumbai – 400021 Bapat Marg, Dadar(W), Mumbai - 400028 Pan/Gir No. Aabcd2354C Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 5

…income from such sales accrues or arises to the assessee in India. In other words no part of such profits accrues from or can be attributed to any activities of the assessee or his agent in India. The Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Hyundai Industries Ltd (292 ITR 482) has held that in the case of an agreement with a South Korean Company for fabrication and installation of oil exploration platform, the PE attributable to installation and commissioning came into existence only after the supply of the equipment. Therefore profits from supply of the platform did not accrue in India. Similarly in the case of Ishik…

DCIT (It) 2(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Daimler Ag (Formerly Known As Daimler Chrysler Ag), Mumbai

ITA 5704/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Dcit (It)-2(1)(2), M/S Daimler Ag Room No. 1713, 17Th Floor, C/O Srbc & Associates Llp बिधम/ Air India Building, 14Th Floor, The Ruby, Nariman Point, 29 Senapati Bapat Marg, Vs. Mumbai-400021 Dadar (W), Mumbai-400050 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aabcd2354C (अऩीराथी /Revenue) (प्रत्मथी / Assessee) :

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Lohia &For Respondent: Shri V. Vidhyadhar, Sr. D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 5(2)Section 9(1)(i)

…income from such sales accrues or arises to the assessee in India. In other words no part of such profits accrues from or can be attributed to any activities of the assessee or his agent in India. The Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Hyundai Industries Ltd (292 ITR 482) has held that in the case of an agreement with a South Korean Company for fabrication and installation of oil exploration platform, the PE attributable to installation and commissioning came into existence only after the supply of the equipment. Therefore profits from supply of the platf orm did not accrue in India. Similarly in the case of Ishi…

ACIT, Chennai vs. Smt. D.Yasodha, Chennai

ITA 1124/CHNY/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Jan 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri M.N. Maurya, CITFor Respondent: 13.12.2017
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 40

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘सी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी ए. मोहन अलंकामणी, लेखा सद"य एवं "ी धु"वु" आर.एल रे"डी, "या"यक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.1242/Mds/2011 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Vs The Additional Commissioner of Smt. D. Yasodha, Income Tax, No.46-49, Royapettah High School, Business Range IX, Royapettah, Chennai – 34. Chennai. PAN: AAVPY0203A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.1387/Mds/2011 & 1124/Mds/2012 ("नधा"रणवष" / Ass…

ACIT, Chennai vs. Smt. D.Yasodha, Chennai

ITA 1387/CHNY/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Jan 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri M.N. Maurya, CITFor Respondent: 13.12.2017
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 40

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘सी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी ए. मोहन अलंकामणी, लेखा सद"य एवं "ी धु"वु" आर.एल रे"डी, "या"यक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.1242/Mds/2011 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Vs The Additional Commissioner of Smt. D. Yasodha, Income Tax, No.46-49, Royapettah High School, Business Range IX, Royapettah, Chennai – 34. Chennai. PAN: AAVPY0203A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.1387/Mds/2011 & 1124/Mds/2012 ("नधा"रणवष" / Ass…

D.Yasodha, Chennai vs. Additional CIT, Chennai

ITA 1242/CHNY/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Jan 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri M.N. Maurya, CITFor Respondent: 13.12.2017
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 40

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘सी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी ए. मोहन अलंकामणी, लेखा सद"य एवं "ी धु"वु" आर.एल रे"डी, "या"यक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.1242/Mds/2011 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Vs The Additional Commissioner of Smt. D. Yasodha, Income Tax, No.46-49, Royapettah High School, Business Range IX, Royapettah, Chennai – 34. Chennai. PAN: AAVPY0203A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.1387/Mds/2011 & 1124/Mds/2012 ("नधा"रणवष" / Ass…

Late N.Murughasan (Rep by Legal Heir Shri M.Rajasekar), Nagapattinam vs. ACIT, Thanjavur

ITA 3468/CHNY/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Nov 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No. 1196/Mds/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Vs Smt. Jayanthi Balaji, The Income Tax Officer, No.388, Kalyani Illam, Business Ward X(2), Tiruvottiyur High Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 019. Pan: Acapj2172J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

…os.119/Mds/2011, 68/Mds/2014 & 31/Mds/2015 h) Latest Photograph showing evidence of cultivation in and around the subject land. i) Opinion from Shri S Rajaratinam, retired Honorable ITAT member. j) Case law of MS Srinivasa Naicker vs. Income Tax Officer, 2007 292 ITR 482 Mds. The Ld.AR further made the following submission before the Ld.AO to justify the stand of the assessee:- 1. The land sold by the assessee was subject to agricultural operations till the date of sale. 2. The land was not situated within the notified area declared by the Central Government. 3. Joint Venture Agreement between the parties estab…

J.Srinivasan, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

ITA 3467/CHNY/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Nov 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No. 1196/Mds/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Vs Smt. Jayanthi Balaji, The Income Tax Officer, No.388, Kalyani Illam, Business Ward X(2), Tiruvottiyur High Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 019. Pan: Acapj2172J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

…os.119/Mds/2011, 68/Mds/2014 & 31/Mds/2015 h) Latest Photograph showing evidence of cultivation in and around the subject land. i) Opinion from Shri S Rajaratinam, retired Honorable ITAT member. j) Case law of MS Srinivasa Naicker vs. Income Tax Officer, 2007 292 ITR 482 Mds. The Ld.AR further made the following submission before the Ld.AO to justify the stand of the assessee:- 1. The land sold by the assessee was subject to agricultural operations till the date of sale. 2. The land was not situated within the notified area declared by the Central Government. 3. Joint Venture Agreement between the parties estab…

ITO, Chennai vs. P.Venkatesan, Chennai

ITA 699/CHNY/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No. 1196/Mds/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Vs Smt. Jayanthi Balaji, The Income Tax Officer, No.388, Kalyani Illam, Business Ward X(2), Tiruvottiyur High Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 019. Pan: Acapj2172J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

…os.119/Mds/2011, 68/Mds/2014 & 31/Mds/2015 h) Latest Photograph showing evidence of cultivation in and around the subject land. i) Opinion from Shri S Rajaratinam, retired Honorable ITAT member. j) Case law of MS Srinivasa Naicker vs. Income Tax Officer, 2007 292 ITR 482 Mds. The Ld.AR further made the following submission before the Ld.AO to justify the stand of the assessee:- 1. The land sold by the assessee was subject to agricultural operations till the date of sale. 2. The land was not situated within the notified area declared by the Central Government. 3. Joint Venture Agreement between the parties estab…

ACIT, Thanjavur vs. Shri N.Murugahasan, Nagapattinam

ITA 1720/CHNY/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Nov 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No. 1196/Mds/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Vs Smt. Jayanthi Balaji, The Income Tax Officer, No.388, Kalyani Illam, Business Ward X(2), Tiruvottiyur High Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 019. Pan: Acapj2172J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

…os.119/Mds/2011, 68/Mds/2014 & 31/Mds/2015 h) Latest Photograph showing evidence of cultivation in and around the subject land. i) Opinion from Shri S Rajaratinam, retired Honorable ITAT member. j) Case law of MS Srinivasa Naicker vs. Income Tax Officer, 2007 292 ITR 482 Mds. The Ld.AR further made the following submission before the Ld.AO to justify the stand of the assessee:- 1. The land sold by the assessee was subject to agricultural operations till the date of sale. 2. The land was not situated within the notified area declared by the Central Government. 3. Joint Venture Agreement between the parties estab…

ACIT, Chennai vs. Shri J.Srinivasan, Chennai

ITA 1602/CHNY/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Nov 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No. 1196/Mds/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Vs Smt. Jayanthi Balaji, The Income Tax Officer, No.388, Kalyani Illam, Business Ward X(2), Tiruvottiyur High Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 019. Pan: Acapj2172J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

…os.119/Mds/2011, 68/Mds/2014 & 31/Mds/2015 h) Latest Photograph showing evidence of cultivation in and around the subject land. i) Opinion from Shri S Rajaratinam, retired Honorable ITAT member. j) Case law of MS Srinivasa Naicker vs. Income Tax Officer, 2007 292 ITR 482 Mds. The Ld.AR further made the following submission before the Ld.AO to justify the stand of the assessee:- 1. The land sold by the assessee was subject to agricultural operations till the date of sale. 2. The land was not situated within the notified area declared by the Central Government. 3. Joint Venture Agreement between the parties estab…

ACIT, Chennai vs. Shri S.Srinivasan, Chennai

ITA 1380/CHNY/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Nov 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No. 1196/Mds/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Vs Smt. Jayanthi Balaji, The Income Tax Officer, No.388, Kalyani Illam, Business Ward X(2), Tiruvottiyur High Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 019. Pan: Acapj2172J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

…os.119/Mds/2011, 68/Mds/2014 & 31/Mds/2015 h) Latest Photograph showing evidence of cultivation in and around the subject land. i) Opinion from Shri S Rajaratinam, retired Honorable ITAT member. j) Case law of MS Srinivasa Naicker vs. Income Tax Officer, 2007 292 ITR 482 Mds. The Ld.AR further made the following submission before the Ld.AO to justify the stand of the assessee:- 1. The land sold by the assessee was subject to agricultural operations till the date of sale. 2. The land was not situated within the notified area declared by the Central Government. 3. Joint Venture Agreement between the parties estab…

ACIT, Chennai vs. Smt. S.Anuradha, Chennai

ITA 1379/CHNY/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Nov 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No. 1196/Mds/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Vs Smt. Jayanthi Balaji, The Income Tax Officer, No.388, Kalyani Illam, Business Ward X(2), Tiruvottiyur High Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 019. Pan: Acapj2172J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

…os.119/Mds/2011, 68/Mds/2014 & 31/Mds/2015 h) Latest Photograph showing evidence of cultivation in and around the subject land. i) Opinion from Shri S Rajaratinam, retired Honorable ITAT member. j) Case law of MS Srinivasa Naicker vs. Income Tax Officer, 2007 292 ITR 482 Mds. The Ld.AR further made the following submission before the Ld.AO to justify the stand of the assessee:- 1. The land sold by the assessee was subject to agricultural operations till the date of sale. 2. The land was not situated within the notified area declared by the Central Government. 3. Joint Venture Agreement between the parties estab…

ACIT, Chennai vs. Sri. P.Venkatesan, Chennai

ITA 1378/CHNY/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Nov 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No. 1196/Mds/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Vs Smt. Jayanthi Balaji, The Income Tax Officer, No.388, Kalyani Illam, Business Ward X(2), Tiruvottiyur High Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 019. Pan: Acapj2172J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

…os.119/Mds/2011, 68/Mds/2014 & 31/Mds/2015 h) Latest Photograph showing evidence of cultivation in and around the subject land. i) Opinion from Shri S Rajaratinam, retired Honorable ITAT member. j) Case law of MS Srinivasa Naicker vs. Income Tax Officer, 2007 292 ITR 482 Mds. The Ld.AR further made the following submission before the Ld.AO to justify the stand of the assessee:- 1. The land sold by the assessee was subject to agricultural operations till the date of sale. 2. The land was not situated within the notified area declared by the Central Government. 3. Joint Venture Agreement between the parties estab…

ACIT, Chennai vs. Smt. J.Shanthi, Chennai

ITA 1377/CHNY/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Nov 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No. 1196/Mds/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Vs Smt. Jayanthi Balaji, The Income Tax Officer, No.388, Kalyani Illam, Business Ward X(2), Tiruvottiyur High Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 019. Pan: Acapj2172J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

…os.119/Mds/2011, 68/Mds/2014 & 31/Mds/2015 h) Latest Photograph showing evidence of cultivation in and around the subject land. i) Opinion from Shri S Rajaratinam, retired Honorable ITAT member. j) Case law of MS Srinivasa Naicker vs. Income Tax Officer, 2007 292 ITR 482 Mds. The Ld.AR further made the following submission before the Ld.AO to justify the stand of the assessee:- 1. The land sold by the assessee was subject to agricultural operations till the date of sale. 2. The land was not situated within the notified area declared by the Central Government. 3. Joint Venture Agreement between the parties estab…

ACIT, Chennai vs. Shri J.Balaji (Indl)., Chennai

ITA 1198/CHNY/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Nov 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No. 1196/Mds/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Vs Smt. Jayanthi Balaji, The Income Tax Officer, No.388, Kalyani Illam, Business Ward X(2), Tiruvottiyur High Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 019. Pan: Acapj2172J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

…os.119/Mds/2011, 68/Mds/2014 & 31/Mds/2015 h) Latest Photograph showing evidence of cultivation in and around the subject land. i) Opinion from Shri S Rajaratinam, retired Honorable ITAT member. j) Case law of MS Srinivasa Naicker vs. Income Tax Officer, 2007 292 ITR 482 Mds. The Ld.AR further made the following submission before the Ld.AO to justify the stand of the assessee:- 1. The land sold by the assessee was subject to agricultural operations till the date of sale. 2. The land was not situated within the notified area declared by the Central Government. 3. Joint Venture Agreement between the parties estab…

ITO, Chennai vs. Smt. Jayanthi Balaji, Chennai

ITA 1196/CHNY/2011[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Nov 2017AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No. 1196/Mds/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Vs Smt. Jayanthi Balaji, The Income Tax Officer, No.388, Kalyani Illam, Business Ward X(2), Tiruvottiyur High Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 019. Pan: Acapj2172J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

…os.119/Mds/2011, 68/Mds/2014 & 31/Mds/2015 h) Latest Photograph showing evidence of cultivation in and around the subject land. i) Opinion from Shri S Rajaratinam, retired Honorable ITAT member. j) Case law of MS Srinivasa Naicker vs. Income Tax Officer, 2007 292 ITR 482 Mds. The Ld.AR further made the following submission before the Ld.AO to justify the stand of the assessee:- 1. The land sold by the assessee was subject to agricultural operations till the date of sale. 2. The land was not situated within the notified area declared by the Central Government. 3. Joint Venture Agreement between the parties estab…