Oordac Jet India P Ltd. v. ACIT

112 ITD 79Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2008#6953 most cited
16

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 10(38)Section 115JBSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 195Section 37

Issues it is cited on

section 40(1)section 102section 114within four yearsfresh tangible materialfull and true disclosurefirst proviso to section 147prohibited by lawmaterial facts necessary for assessmentkelvinatormere change of opinionlive link

Judgments citing Oordac Jet India P Ltd. v. ACIT

DCIT 3.2.1, MUMBAI vs. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LIMITED, MUMBAI

Accordingly, Ground No.1 to 4 raised by the Assessee are allowed

ITA 2830/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Farooq IraniFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar&
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ists between reinsurance agent and NRs. (e) AO also cited case laws in favour of the Department: (i) R.D. Aggarwal & Company 56 ITR 20, 128 ITR 27 (Mad)-w.r.t. business connection (ii) Kanchan ganga Sea Foods Ltd AIT 2010 264 SC, Van Oordac Jet India P Ltd 112 ITD 79, Transmission Corporation of Andhra Pradesh 239 ITR 587, Poompuhar Shipping Corporation Ltd 109 ITD 226, Frontier Offshore Exploration India Ltd ITA No. 2037/Mads/06, West Asia Maritime Ltd (ITAT Chennai), AAR in Rajiv Malhotra (in Re)- w.r.t. withholding tax (f) AO also held, without prejudice to the above reasons, that such payments were allowa…

DCIT 3.2.1, MUMBAI vs. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LIMITED, MUMBAI

Accordingly, Ground No.1 to 4 raised by the Assessee are allowed

ITA 2823/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Farooq IraniFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar&
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ists between reinsurance agent and NRs. (e) AO also cited case laws in favour of the Department: (i) R.D. Aggarwal & Company 56 ITR 20, 128 ITR 27 (Mad)-w.r.t. business connection (ii) Kanchan ganga Sea Foods Ltd AIT 2010 264 SC, Van Oordac Jet India P Ltd 112 ITD 79, Transmission Corporation of Andhra Pradesh 239 ITR 587, Poompuhar Shipping Corporation Ltd 109 ITD 226, Frontier Offshore Exploration India Ltd ITA No. 2037/Mads/06, West Asia Maritime Ltd (ITAT Chennai), AAR in Rajiv Malhotra (in Re)- w.r.t. withholding tax (f) AO also held, without prejudice to the above reasons, that such payments were allowa…

THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 3(2)(2), MUMBAI

Accordingly, Ground No.1 to 4 raised by the Assessee are allowed

ITA 2622/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Farooq IraniFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar&
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ists between reinsurance agent and NRs. (e) AO also cited case laws in favour of the Department: (i) R.D. Aggarwal & Company 56 ITR 20, 128 ITR 27 (Mad)-w.r.t. business connection (ii) Kanchan ganga Sea Foods Ltd AIT 2010 264 SC, Van Oordac Jet India P Ltd 112 ITD 79, Transmission Corporation of Andhra Pradesh 239 ITR 587, Poompuhar Shipping Corporation Ltd 109 ITD 226, Frontier Offshore Exploration India Ltd ITA No. 2037/Mads/06, West Asia Maritime Ltd (ITAT Chennai), AAR in Rajiv Malhotra (in Re)- w.r.t. withholding tax (f) AO also held, without prejudice to the above reasons, that such payments were allowa…

THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 3(2)(2), MUMBAI

Accordingly, Ground No.1 to 4 raised by the Assessee are allowed

ITA 2616/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Farooq IraniFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar&
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ists between reinsurance agent and NRs. (e) AO also cited case laws in favour of the Department: (i) R.D. Aggarwal & Company 56 ITR 20, 128 ITR 27 (Mad)-w.r.t. business connection (ii) Kanchan ganga Sea Foods Ltd AIT 2010 264 SC, Van Oordac Jet India P Ltd 112 ITD 79, Transmission Corporation of Andhra Pradesh 239 ITR 587, Poompuhar Shipping Corporation Ltd 109 ITD 226, Frontier Offshore Exploration India Ltd ITA No. 2037/Mads/06, West Asia Maritime Ltd (ITAT Chennai), AAR in Rajiv Malhotra (in Re)- w.r.t. withholding tax (f) AO also held, without prejudice to the above reasons, that such payments were allowa…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE CO. LTD., CHENNAI

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

ITA 1666/CHNY/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2005-06

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

…the non deduction or lesser deduction of tax, because the chargeability of sum paid is different from the taxability of the above sum. b. Further, as per the decision of Honourable Delhi Tribunal in the case of Van Oordac Jet India P Ltd., Vs ACIT reported in 112 ITD 79, has clearly stated that the assessee can not step into the shoes of the assessing Officer for the purpose of determining the chargeability on the non-resident payments. Hence, it is the obligation on the part of the assessee to deduct the tax at source as per the section 195 of the act & above cited decision of the Hon'ble Delhi Tribunal is squar…

M/S. ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

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

ITA 1630/CHNY/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

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

…the non deduction or lesser deduction of tax, because the chargeability of sum paid is different from the taxability of the above sum. b. Further, as per the decision of Honourable Delhi Tribunal in the case of Van Oordac Jet India P Ltd., Vs ACIT reported in 112 ITD 79, has clearly stated that the assessee can not step into the shoes of the assessing Officer for the purpose of determining the chargeability on the non-resident payments. Hence, it is the obligation on the part of the assessee to deduct the tax at source as per the section 195 of the act & above cited decision of the Hon'ble Delhi Tribunal is squar…

M/S. ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

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

ITA 1629/CHNY/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2007-08

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

…the non deduction or lesser deduction of tax, because the chargeability of sum paid is different from the taxability of the above sum. b. Further, as per the decision of Honourable Delhi Tribunal in the case of Van Oordac Jet India P Ltd., Vs ACIT reported in 112 ITD 79, has clearly stated that the assessee can not step into the shoes of the assessing Officer for the purpose of determining the chargeability on the non-resident payments. Hence, it is the obligation on the part of the assessee to deduct the tax at source as per the section 195 of the act & above cited decision of the Hon'ble Delhi Tribunal is squar…

M/S. ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

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

ITA 1628/CHNY/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2006-07

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

…the non deduction or lesser deduction of tax, because the chargeability of sum paid is different from the taxability of the above sum. b. Further, as per the decision of Honourable Delhi Tribunal in the case of Van Oordac Jet India P Ltd., Vs ACIT reported in 112 ITD 79, has clearly stated that the assessee can not step into the shoes of the assessing Officer for the purpose of determining the chargeability on the non-resident payments. Hence, it is the obligation on the part of the assessee to deduct the tax at source as per the section 195 of the act & above cited decision of the Hon'ble Delhi Tribunal is squar…

M/S. ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

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

ITA 1626/CHNY/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2005-06

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

…the non deduction or lesser deduction of tax, because the chargeability of sum paid is different from the taxability of the above sum. b. Further, as per the decision of Honourable Delhi Tribunal in the case of Van Oordac Jet India P Ltd., Vs ACIT reported in 112 ITD 79, has clearly stated that the assessee can not step into the shoes of the assessing Officer for the purpose of determining the chargeability on the non-resident payments. Hence, it is the obligation on the part of the assessee to deduct the tax at source as per the section 195 of the act & above cited decision of the Hon'ble Delhi Tribunal is squar…

ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ADDL. CIT, CHENNAI

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

ITA 2310/CHNY/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

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

…the non deduction or lesser deduction of tax, because the chargeability of sum paid is different from the taxability of the above sum. b. Further, as per the decision of Honourable Delhi Tribunal in the case of Van Oordac Jet India P Ltd., Vs ACIT reported in 112 ITD 79, has clearly stated that the assessee can not step into the shoes of the assessing Officer for the purpose of determining the chargeability on the non-resident payments. Hence, it is the obligation on the part of the assessee to deduct the tax at source as per the section 195 of the act & above cited decision of the Hon'ble Delhi Tribunal is squar…

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

…the non deduction or lesser deduction of tax, because the chargeability of sum paid is different from the taxability of the above sum. b. Further, as per the decision of Honourable Delhi Tribunal in the case of Van Oordac Jet India P Ltd., Vs ACIT reported in 112 ITD 79, has clearly stated that the assessee can not step into the shoes of the assessing Officer for the purpose of determining the chargeability on the non-resident payments. Hence, it is the obligation on the part of the assessee to deduct the tax at source as per the section 195 of the act & above cited decision of the Hon'ble Delhi Tribunal is squar…

RANE ENGINE VALVES LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1496/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Mar 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1175, 1495 & 1496/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 M/S.Rane Engine Valves Ltd., V. The Dy. Commissioner- “Maithri” No.132, Of Income Tax, Cathedral Road, Corporate Circle-5(3), Chennai-600 086. Chennai. [Pan: Aaact 1279 M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By Mr.Vikram Vijayaraghavan, Adv. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.P.V.Pradeep Kumar, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03.03.2022 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09.03.2022

For Respondent: Mr.P.V.Pradeep Kumar, CIT
Section 10Section 195Section 35DSection 37Section 40A

…d in confirming the disallowance of Professional fees paid to nonresidents for non-deduction of Tax at source. 2.1 The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in relying on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Van Oord ACZ India Pvt Ltd v Addl CIT (112 ITD 79) which has been reversed by the Hon'ble High Court in 323 ITR 130 (Del). 2.2 The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in holding that appellant has not proved as to whether the payment made to the non-residents was a professional fee or a commission without appreciating that the assessing officer has not disputed the payment of professional…

RANE ENGINE VALVES LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1495/CHNY/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Mar 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1175, 1495 & 1496/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 M/S.Rane Engine Valves Ltd., V. The Dy. Commissioner- “Maithri” No.132, Of Income Tax, Cathedral Road, Corporate Circle-5(3), Chennai-600 086. Chennai. [Pan: Aaact 1279 M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By Mr.Vikram Vijayaraghavan, Adv. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.P.V.Pradeep Kumar, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03.03.2022 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09.03.2022

For Respondent: Mr.P.V.Pradeep Kumar, CIT
Section 10Section 195Section 35DSection 37Section 40A

…d in confirming the disallowance of Professional fees paid to nonresidents for non-deduction of Tax at source. 2.1 The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in relying on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Van Oord ACZ India Pvt Ltd v Addl CIT (112 ITD 79) which has been reversed by the Hon'ble High Court in 323 ITR 130 (Del). 2.2 The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in holding that appellant has not proved as to whether the payment made to the non-residents was a professional fee or a commission without appreciating that the assessing officer has not disputed the payment of professional…

RANE ENGINE VALVES LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1175/CHNY/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Mar 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1175, 1495 & 1496/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 M/S.Rane Engine Valves Ltd., V. The Dy. Commissioner- “Maithri” No.132, Of Income Tax, Cathedral Road, Corporate Circle-5(3), Chennai-600 086. Chennai. [Pan: Aaact 1279 M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By Mr.Vikram Vijayaraghavan, Adv. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.P.V.Pradeep Kumar, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03.03.2022 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09.03.2022

For Respondent: Mr.P.V.Pradeep Kumar, CIT
Section 10Section 195Section 35DSection 37Section 40A

…d in confirming the disallowance of Professional fees paid to nonresidents for non-deduction of Tax at source. 2.1 The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in relying on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Van Oord ACZ India Pvt Ltd v Addl CIT (112 ITD 79) which has been reversed by the Hon'ble High Court in 323 ITR 130 (Del). 2.2 The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in holding that appellant has not proved as to whether the payment made to the non-residents was a professional fee or a commission without appreciating that the assessing officer has not disputed the payment of professional…

M/S UB INTERNATIONAL TRADING LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. ITO, BANGALORE

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

ITA 1246/BANG/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 194CSection 201(1)Section 204Section 40

…rranted on reimbursement of expenses which are separately billed, the CIT(Appeals) observed that this decision of ITAT was passed after considering the decision in the case of Transmission Corporation of A.P. Ltd (SC) 239 ITR 587 and Van Oord ACZ India (p)Ltd 112 ITD 79. Further, it is a settled issue that TDS provisions apply to grow some paid to the contractor and not the sum paid bill wise, thus TDS has to be made on the gross amount of the bill if the payment is made on account of a contractual obligation. The same has been clarified in question number 30 circular number 715 of the CBDT. The payment in questi…

M/S BALMER LAWRIES & CO. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(IT) WD-1(1), KOLKATA, 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)

…), Kol. Page 43 therefore there was need to deduct tax at source. This decision has no application in the facts and circumstances of the instant case. 25. The fifth decision of Delhi Bench of the learned Tribunal in Van Oord ACZ India Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT (2008) 112 ITD 79 (Del), cited by the Revenue is again distinguishable on facts. There, the assessee an Indian Company was a wholly owned subsidiary of VOAMC, a foreign company. The Indian Company was to execute a dredging contract at certain port in Gujarat. As it did not have the technical competence and infrastructure to execute the aforesaid contract, the VOAMC…