How many judgments cite Oord ACZ India (P) Ltd. v. CIT?

35 judgments on BharatTax cite Oord ACZ India (P) Ltd. v. CIT (323 ITR 130), spanning 2011 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Oord ACZ India (P) Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 115JB, Section 143(3), Section 194C, Section 194J, Section 195, Section 200(1).

Oord ACZ India (P) Ltd. v. CIT

323 ITR 130High Court2010#3416 most cited

What is Oord ACZ India (P) Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Where the recipient of income is not liable to pay tax in India, the payer has no obligation to deduct tax at source. Consequently, no disallowance under section 40(a)(i) can be made for failure to deduct such tax.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,369 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Van Oord ACZ India (P) Ltd v. CIT · section 40(a)(i) · section 190 · section 191 · payer obligation · recipient liability · taxability · TDS

Also reported as

189 Taxmann 232

Sections most often in play

Section 115JB Section 143(3)Section 194C Section 194J Section 195 Section 200(1)Section 250 Section 4

Issues it is cited on

section 9(i)(vii)section 194j section 44aa section 40(a)(i)withholding tax section 9(1)(vii)business connection section 195 section 194h transactional net margin method fees for technical services permanent establishment

Judgments citing Oord ACZ India (P) Ltd. v. CIT

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Jas Forwarding World Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal of the Assessee is allowed whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3222/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 May 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuasstt. Year:2007-08

For Respondent: Shri Robin Rawan, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40

…make it clear that liability to deduct tax at source arises only when the sum payable to the non-resident is chargeable to tax. This view has also been followed by the jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in the case of Van Oord ACZ India (P) Ltd. v CIT (2010) 323 ITR 130(Del): 189 Taxman 232( Del) 230 CTR(Del) 365. On the issue as to whether section 195(1) arises only if the payment is chargeable to true in the hands of the recipient, I find that the issue is now covered and settled by the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of GE India Technology Cent. (P.) Ltd. (2010) 327 ITR 456 wherein the Hon'b…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Grant Thornton, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue dismissed

ITA 4143/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jan 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2010-11

Section 143(2)Section 195Section 37Section 40Section 9

…. In our opinion, the finding of the Ld. CIT(A) is in accordance with the established legal position on the issue . 3.10 Further the Ld. CIT(A) in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Van Oord ACZ India (P) Ltd versus CIT (2010) 323 ITR 130 (del) has held that the sum payable to the nonresidents was not chargeable to income tax in their hands and thus the assessee was not liable for deduction of tax at 11 source on such payment under the provisions of section 195 and no disallowance under section 40(a)(i) could be made. 3.11 We find that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on the issue in d…

DCIT, Central Circle - 1(4), Kolkata vs. M/S. Hindustan Urban Infrastructure Ltd.(Hindustan Vidyut Product Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 1616/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganesh

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 246ASection 271(1)(c)Section 40Section 40ASection 9(1)(vii)

…आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “A” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “A” KOLKATA Before Shri S.S.Godara, Judicial Member and Shri, M. Balaganesh, Accountant Member ITA No.1615-1616/Kol/2017 & C.O. No.87Kol/2017 (a/o ITA No.1615/Kol/2017) Assessment Years :2011-12 & 2012-13) DCIT, Central Circle- V/s. M/s Hindustan Urban 1(4), 3rd Floor, Aayakar Infrastructure Ltd. Bhawan, Poorva, 110, (Hindustan Vidyut Product Ltd.) 7th Floor, Shanti Pally,Kolkata-107 Kanchenjunga Building, 18, Barakamba Road, New Delhi-110001 [PAN No.AAACT 2345 J] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent/ "तया"ेपक/ Co-obj…

DCIT, Central Circle - 1(4), Kolkata vs. M/S. Hindustan Urban Infrastructure Ltd.(Hindustan Vidyut Product Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 1615/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganesh

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 246ASection 271(1)(c)Section 40Section 40ASection 9(1)(vii)

ITO, New Delhi vs. Sh. Kulbeer Singh, New Delhi

ITA 5204/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishiito, Vs. Kulbeer Singh, Ward-26(1), H-432, Vikas Puri, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Amqps5847P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, Sr. DR

Section 143Section 195Section 197Section 40Section 9

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “D”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITO, Vs. Kulbeer Singh, Ward-26(1), H-432, Vikas Puri, New Delhi New Delhi PAN: AMQPS5847P (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue by : Shri Amit Jain, Sr. DR Assessee by: None Date of Hearing 25/07/2018 Date of pronouncement 03/10/2018 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. This appeal is filed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward – 26 (1), New Delhi against the order of The Commissioner Of Income Tax Appeals – XXIV , New Delhi dated 3/7/2014 for AY 2010 – 11 where the only i…

Granite Services International India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 740/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Granite Services Dcit International India Private Vs Circle-10(2), Limited, Building No.7A, New Delhi 5Th Floor, Dlf Cyber City, Phase-Iii, Sector -25A, Gurgaon-122002 Pan Aaccg3374Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143Section 144CSection 92Section 92C

…d such interpretation would mean obliteration of expression “sum chargeable under the provisions of the Act” 30. Referring to the following decisions, he submitted that similar view has been taken by the Courts. (1) Van Oord ACZ India (P) Ltd. vs. CIT [2010] 323 ITR 130 (Delhi HC) (2) ITO vs. Prasad Production Ltd. [2010] 129 TTJ 641 (Chennai ITAT) (3) DCIT vs. Dhaanya Seeds (P) Ltd. [2013] 64 SOT 15 (Bangalore ITAT) (4) CIT vs. EON Technology (P.) Ltd. [2011] 343 ITR 366 (Delhi HC) (5) DIT vs. Ericsson Communications Ltd. [2015] 61 taxmann.com 117 (Delhi HC) (6) CIT vs. Divi's Laboratories Ltd. [2011] 12 taxman…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Silicon Graphics Systems (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2937/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Dec 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Kaushlendra Tiwari, Sr.D.RFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kaushik, Adv

Section 143(3)

…made to a non-resident is essentially in the nature of a cost reimbursement as in the present case. A very direct support is drawn in this regard from the following decisions: i. Decision of Delhi High Court in the case of Van Oord ACZ India (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT 323 ITR 130 (Del.) (copy enclosed): Held that the requirement of TDS does not arises when payment to a non-resident is only in the nature of a reimbursement; ii. Decision of Special Bench of ITAT in the case of Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. Vs DCIT (2009) 122 TTJ (Mum.)(SB)(577) (copy enclosed): Held in this decision of Special Bench as approved by Delhi High Co…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Silicon Graphics Systems (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2935/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Dec 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Kaushlendra Tiwari, Sr.D.RFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kaushik, Adv

Section 143(3)

Ambica Steels Ltd., Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result the appeal is allowed

ITA 3893/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Oct 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kantin Ita No. 3893/Del/2014 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Ambica Steels Ltd. Vs. Addl. Cit C-54/1, Wazirpur Industrial Range -1, Area, Delhi New Delhi (Applicant) (Respondent) (Pan: Aaaca9942Q) Assessee By: Shri S.K. Jain, Ca Shri Nitin Jain, Ca Revenue By: Shri R.C. Danday, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 13/09/2017 Date Of Pronouncement 03/10/2017

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.C. Danday, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 40Section 9

…ITA No. 3893/Del/2014 Assessment Year: 2010-11 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH “A” BENCH NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER In ITA No. 3893/Del/2014 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Ambica Steels Ltd. Vs. Addl. CIT C-54/1, Wazirpur Industrial Range -1, Area, Delhi New Delhi (Applicant) (Respondent) (PAN: AAACA9942Q) Assessee by: Shri S.K. Jain, CA Shri Nitin Jain, CA Revenue by: Shri R.C. Danday, Sr. DR Date of hearing 13/09/2017 Date of pronouncement 03/10/2017 ORDER PER AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER: The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the asse…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Modi Apollo International Group Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue for A

ITA 223/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: : Shri L.P. Sahu & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 195Section 35ASection 40

…element of income therein. Reliance in this regard is placed on following decisions: • CIT vs Tejaji Farsaram Kharawalla Ltd.: 61 ITR 95 (SC) • CIT v. Industrial Engineering Projects Private Limited: 202 ITR 1014 (Del.) • Van Oord ACZ India P. Ltd. v. CIT: 323 ITR 130 (Del.) -ft>n C fc**ft2 • CIT v. Fortis Healthcare ltd.: 181 Taxman 257 (Del.) ~ fa \^ • CIT v Dunlop Rubber Co Ltd.: 142 ITR 493 (Calcutta) ^ • CIT v, SG Pgnatale: 124 ITR 391 (Guj.) • CIT v. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft: 310 ITR 320 (Bom.) • Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd. v. DCIT: 313 ITR 263 (AT)(Mumbai) (SB) • HNS India VSAT Inc. vs. DDIT: 95 ITD 15…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Xansa India Ltd., Noida

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2283/DEL/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Sept 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Ankur Garg, CIT DR

Section 10ASection 40Section 40a

…Page 1 of 91 INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “I-2”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 3671/Del/2013 (Assessment Year: 2005-06) ITA No. 628/Del/2013 (Assessment Year: 2009-10) DCIT, Xansa India Ltd, Circle-18(1), Room No.211A, C-2, Sector-1, Noida, Vs. C. R. Building, New Delhi PAN:AAACI0682B (Appellant) (Respondent) Xansa India Ltd, DCIT, C-2, Sector-1, Noida, Circle-18(1), Room Vs. PAN:AAACI0682B No.211A, C. R. Building, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) DCIT V Xansa India Limited ITA No. 2283/Del/2011 (Assessment Year: 2004-05),…

M/S Balmer Lawries & Co. Ltd., Kolkata vs. Income Tax Officer(It) WD-1(1), Kolkata

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 2079/KOL/2014[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Apr 2016AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2012-13 M/S Balmer Lawrie & Co. V/S. Income Tax Officer Ltd., 21, N.S.Road, (International Taxation), Kolkata-700 001 Ward-1(1), Aayakar [Pan No. Aabcb 0984 E] Bhawan (Poorva), 2Nd Floor, R. No.215, 110, Shanti Pally, Kolkata- 700 107 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri M.K.Poddar, Sr-Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri C.P.Bhatia, Jcit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 18-02-2016 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 27-04-2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement

Section 195Section 201(1)Section 5(2)(b)

…he amount under consideration was not chargeable to tax at all and hence, in such a situation, ratio of the said decision shall not apply. Hon'ble Delhi High Court has also taken such view in its decision the case of Van Oord ACZ India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (2010) 323 ITR 130 (Del), after analysing the ratio given by Supreme Court in the case of Transmission Corporation of AP. Ltd (supra). The position is somewhat peculiar in the appellant’s case. Here, the appellant is making payments towards reimbursement of cost as well as share in profit. It is in fact paying two sums of entirely different nature – the first one b…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Shri Dinesh Kumar Mathur, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5623/DEL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jan 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Smt Suchitra Kamblei.T.A .No.-5623/Del/2011 (Assessment Year-2008-09)

Section 194CSection 194JSection 195Section 40

…t all the cross amount of the bill including reimbursement for actual expenses. The assessee on the other hand relied on a number of judgments including Hon’ble Apex Court and Jurisdictional High Court. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the judgment reported at 323 ITR 130 held that no liability for deduction of tax at source arose u/s 195 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in the case of mobilization and de-mobilization cost reimbursement to a no resident not being taxable in India. Hence, disallowance u/s 40(a) (ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 did not arises. The CIT(A) has taken into account all the relevant audited ac…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Deccan Creations Private Limited, Bangalore

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2010-11 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1382/BANG/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Oct 2015AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijaypal Rao & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwala, JCIT (D.R)For Respondent: Shri P. Dinesh, Advocate

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40Section 5(2)(b)

…ted under Section 195 of the IT Act. 3. The CIT (Appeals) erred in deleting the disallowance of Rs.21,22,336 under Section 40(a)(i) relating to the payments following the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of Van Oord ACZ India (P) Ltd. V CIT (2010) 323 ITR 130 without appreciating the fact tht at according to section5(2)(b) total income includes income deemed to accrue or arise in India and the source of such payment being in India and the source rule reigning over the situs rule the sum is chargeable under the provisions of the Act and that the decision relied upon is not applicable to the facts of th…

CIT vs. Expeditors International Pvt Ltd

The appeal is dismissed

ITA - 1088 / 2011HC Delhi16 Dec 2011

Section 40

…of deduction of tax at source would arise in as much as tax at source is to be deducted on income and not on expenses. Global management expenses were reimbursement of cost and as per the decision in the case of Van Oord ACZ India (P) Ltd. v. CIT, [2010] 323 ITR 130 (Delhi), tax was not deductible. 6. Prima facie, we find force in the argument of learned counsel for the assessee. In any case, this is the view already taken by this Court in the case 2011:DHC:6479-DB ITA No.1088 of 2011 Pa…