Performing Rights Society Ltd. & Anr. v. CIT & Ors.

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-4(2)(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. STAR CRUISE MANAGEMENT LIMITED , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2018-

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

…3. “Whether on the facts and circumstance of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A) erred in holding that there was no business connection of the assessee in India ignoring the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Performing Rights Society Ltd [1977] 106 ITR 11 (SC) [10-08-1976] wherein it was clearly held that though the assessee received the income out of the agreement executed outside India, as is the case of the present assessee, the income undoubtedly accrued or arose in India and was received in India and M/s. Star Cruise Management Ltd. ITA no.3873, 3871 & 3886/Mum/2023 therefore the question whe…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-4(2)(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. STAR CRUISE MANAGEMENT LIMITED , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2018-

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

…3. “Whether on the facts and circumstance of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A) erred in holding that there was no business connection of the assessee in India ignoring the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Performing Rights Society Ltd [1977] 106 ITR 11 (SC) [10-08-1976] wherein it was clearly held that though the assessee received the income out of the agreement executed outside India, as is the case of the present assessee, the income undoubtedly accrued or arose in India and was received in India and M/s. Star Cruise Management Ltd. ITA no.3873, 3871 & 3886/Mum/2023 therefore the question whe…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-4(2)(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. STAR CRUISE MANAGEMENT LIMITED , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2018-

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

…3. “Whether on the facts and circumstance of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A) erred in holding that there was no business connection of the assessee in India ignoring the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Performing Rights Society Ltd [1977] 106 ITR 11 (SC) [10-08-1976] wherein it was clearly held that though the assessee received the income out of the agreement executed outside India, as is the case of the present assessee, the income undoubtedly accrued or arose in India and was received in India and M/s. Star Cruise Management Ltd. ITA no.3873, 3871 & 3886/Mum/2023 therefore the question whe…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (IT)-4(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S STAR CRUISE MANAGEMENT LTD, MUMBAI

…ance of the case and in law, Assessment Year 2013-14 to 2017-18 the Ld CIT(A) erred in holding that there was no business connection of the assessee in India ignoring the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Performing Rights Society Ltd [1977] 106 ITR 11 (SC)[10-08-1976] wherein it was clearly held that though the assessee received the income out of the agreement executed outside India, as is the case of the present assessee, the income undoubtedly accrued or arose in India and was received in India and therefore the question whether it should be 'deemed' to accrue or arise in India is irrelevant.…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (IT)-4(2)(2) , MUMBAI vs. M/S STAR CRUISE MANAGEMENT LTD., MUMBAI

…ance of the case and in law, Assessment Year 2013-14 to 2017-18 the Ld CIT(A) erred in holding that there was no business connection of the assessee in India ignoring the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Performing Rights Society Ltd [1977] 106 ITR 11 (SC)[10-08-1976] wherein it was clearly held that though the assessee received the income out of the agreement executed outside India, as is the case of the present assessee, the income undoubtedly accrued or arose in India and was received in India and therefore the question whether it should be 'deemed' to accrue or arise in India is irrelevant.…

M/S. GLOBAL CRICKET CORPORATION PTE. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DDIT IT-3(1), MUMBAI

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, and cross-objection by the Assessee are disposed off as infructuous

…be understood as per the provisions of the Act as per Article 3(2) of the DTAA. Therefore, the Learned Counsel for Revenue placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Performing Rights Society Ltd. & Anr. Vs. CIT & Ors: [1977] 106 ITR 11(SC) to support the contention that the royalty income arose in India. 5.5. Per contra, the Learned Senior Counsel for GCC submitted that according to Article 12(7) of DTAA payments made from one non-resident to another non-resident would arise in India only when all the following three conditions are satisfied. First, non-resident payer (i.e. SET)…

M/S. GLOBAL CRICKET CORPORATION PTE. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ADIT (INT. TAXATION) - 3(1), MUMBAI

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, and cross-objection by the Assessee are disposed off as infructuous

…be understood as per the provisions of the Act as per Article 3(2) of the DTAA. Therefore, the Learned Counsel for Revenue placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Performing Rights Society Ltd. & Anr. Vs. CIT & Ors: [1977] 106 ITR 11(SC) to support the contention that the royalty income arose in India. 5.5. Per contra, the Learned Senior Counsel for GCC submitted that according to Article 12(7) of DTAA payments made from one non-resident to another non-resident would arise in India only when all the following three conditions are satisfied. First, non-resident payer (i.e. SET)…

ADIT (IT)-3(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. GLOBAL CRICKET CORPORATION PTE. LTD., MUMBAI

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, and cross-objection by the Assessee are disposed off as infructuous

…be understood as per the provisions of the Act as per Article 3(2) of the DTAA. Therefore, the Learned Counsel for Revenue placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Performing Rights Society Ltd. & Anr. Vs. CIT & Ors: [1977] 106 ITR 11(SC) to support the contention that the royalty income arose in India. 5.5. Per contra, the Learned Senior Counsel for GCC submitted that according to Article 12(7) of DTAA payments made from one non-resident to another non-resident would arise in India only when all the following three conditions are satisfied. First, non-resident payer (i.e. SET)…

SPE INDIA FILMS HOLDING LLC,MUMBAI vs. ACIT (INTL TAX) -4(2) (2) , MUMBAI

In the result ground no-2 raised by the assessee- is fully allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Gagan Goyalspe India Films Holding Llc C/O, Deloitte Haskins & Sells Llp One International Centre, Tower No.3, 27Th Floor-32Nd Floor, Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Road (W), Mumbai-400013. Pan: Aaocs1827L ...... Appellant Vs. Acit (International Taxation)-4(2)(2) 16Th Floor, Air India Building, Narimaon Point, Mumbai-400021. ..... Respondent Appellant By : Sh. P.J. Pardiwala/Paras Savla Respondent By : Sh. A.K. Keshari Date Of Hearing : 27/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 21/09/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Dispute Resolution Panel-2, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As [‘Drp’] Dated 06.01.2022 For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2018-19. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “The Appellant, Objects To The Order Dated 19 January 2022 Passed Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act) Passed By The Learned Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax (International Taxation) - 4(2)(2), Mumbai

…as 13 ITA No. 457 Mum 2022-SPE India Films Holding LLC been held quite clearly in Hira Mills Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer, Cawnpore, (p.160) [Emphasis supplied] We shall now refer to the decision of the Supreme Court in Performing Right Society LTD. vs. CIT, 106 ITR 11 in which the question of accrual of income was considered from the standpoint of the charging provisions of the present Act. The argument on behalf of the assessee was that any income for the purpose of section 5(2)(b) relating to a non resident must be income as could be found in section 9(1)(i). Before any liability can be fixed by virtue of sec…

NGC NETWORK ASIA LLC,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (IT) RG 3(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the assessee appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

…rt in the case of Pilcom vs. CIT reported in 116 taxmann.com 394 dated 29/04/2020. The said Hon’ble Supreme Court decision referred to the decision of yet another Hon’ble Supreme Court decision in the case of Performing Rights Society ltd., vs CIT reported in 106 ITR 11. The ld. DR argued that since the broadcast of the channel is conducted in India, the receipts generated therefrom are taxable in India. We find that the decision relied upon by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Pilcom vs. CIT referred to supra was rendered in the context of applicability of provisions relating to deduction of tax at source (T…

M/S. NGC NETWORK ASIA, LLC,MUMBAI vs. THE ITO (IT) 3(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee for A

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm M/S.Ngc Network Asia Llc Vs. Dy. Director Of Income Tax C/O. Dsk Legal (International Tax)– 3(2) 4Th Floor, Express Towers Scindia House Nariman Point Ballard Estate Mumbai – 400 021 Mumbai – 400 038 Pan/Gir No.Aabcn3136G (Appellant) .. (Respondent) M/S.Ngc Network Asia Llc Vs. Assistant Director Of C/O. Ngc Network(India) Income Tax (International Private Limited Tax)– 3(2) 1St Floor, Scindia House Star House, Dr. E. Moses Road, Mahalaxmi Ballard Estate Mumbai – 400 001 Mumbai – 400001 Pan/Gir No.Aabcn3136G (Appellant) .. (Respondent) M/S.Ngc Network Asia Llc Vs. The Income Tax Officer C/O. Ngc Network(India) (International Tax) 3(1) Private Limited Scindia House Star House, Dr. E. Moses Ballard Estate Road, Mahalaxmi Mumbai – 400001 Mumbai – 400 001 Pan/Gir No.Aabcn3136G (Appellant) .. (Respondent) M/S. Ngc Network Asia Ltd., M/S.Ngc Network Asia Llc Vs. The Income Tax Officer C/O. Ngc Network(India) (International Tax) 3(1) Private Limited Scindia House Star House, Dr. E. Moses Ballard Estate Road, Mahalaxmi Mumbai – 400038 Mumbai – 400 001 Pan/Gir No.Aabcn3136G (Appellant) .. (Respondent) & M/S.Ngc Network Asia Llc Vs. The Income Tax Officer C/O. Ngc Network(India) (International Tax) 3(2) Private Limited Scindia House Star House, Dr. E. Moses Ballard Estate Road, Mahalaxmi Mumbai – 400038 Mumbai – 400 001 Pan/Gir No.Aabcn3136G (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Porus Kaka Revenue By Shri Shreenivasaraghava Iyengar Date Of Hearing 18/12/2020 Date Of Pronouncement 30/12/2020

…rt in the case of Pilcom vs. CIT reported in 116 taxmann.com 394 dated 29/04/2020. The said Hon‟ble Supreme Court decision referred to the decision of yet another Hon‟ble Supreme Court decision in the case of Performing Rights Society ltd., vs CIT reported in 106 ITR 11. The ld. DR argued that since the broadcast of the channel is conducted in India, the receipts generated therefrom are taxable in India. We find that the decision relied upon by the Hon‟ble Apex Court in the case of Pilcom vs. CIT referred to supra was rendered in the context of applicability of provisions relating to deduction of tax at source (T…

INCOME TAX OFFICER-23(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. INDIAN CORPORATE LOAN SECURITIES TRUST 2008 SERIES 14, MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue's appeal for A

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm The Ito-23(1)(2) Vs. M/S. Indian Corporate Loan Room No.18 Securities Trust 2008 Matru Mandir Series 14 Grant Road Il & Fs Financial Centre Mumbai – 400 007 Plot No.C-22, G Block 3Rd Floor, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East Mumbai – 400 051 Pan/Gir No. Aaat16786P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) The Ito-23(1)(2) Vs. M/S. Indian Corporate Loan Room No.18 Securities Trust Series Iii Matru Mandir 2009 Grant Road Il & Fs Financial Centre Mumbai – 400 007 Plot No.C-22, G Block Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East Mumbai – 400 051 Pan/Gir No. Aaat17440L (Appellant) .. (Respondent) The Ito-23(1)(2) Vs. M/S. Indian Corporate Loan Room No.18 Securities Trust Series Matru Mandir 2008 Series 36 Grant Road Il & Fs Financial Centre Mumbai – 400 007 Plot No.C-22, G Block Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East Mumbai – 400 051 Pan/Gir No. Aaat16925L (Appellant) .. (Respondent) आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Appeals In Ita No.4789/Mum/2017, 4791/Mum/2017 & 4794/Mum/2017 For A.Y.2010-11 Arise Out Of The Order By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-32, Mumbai In Appeal No.Cit(A)- 32/It-604/23(1)(2)/2015-16, Cit(A)-32/It-48/19(3)(2)/2012-13 & Cit(A)-32/It-483/Ito-19(3)(4)/12-13 Respectively Dated 24/04/2017 (Ld. Cit(A) In Short) Against The Order Of Assessment Passed U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As Act) Dated 26/02/2016, 31/10/2012 Respectively By The Ld. Income Tax Officer – 23(1)(2) & 19(3)(2) Respectively, Mumbai (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. Ao).

…nce. Since this case is factually different from that of the case on hand, it is not applicable. (vii) Vellore Electric Corpn. Ltd. v. CIT[1997] 227 ITR 557/93 Taxman 401 (SC) Follows Associated Power Co. Ltd. (viii) Performing Right Society Ltd. v. CIT[1977] 106 ITR 11 (SC) In this cited case the Hon'ble Apex Court held that this was a case of case and therefore the same would not be applicable to the case on hand. (ix) CIT v. Madras Race Club[2002] 255 ITR 98/[2003] 126 Taxman 6 (Mad.) The facts of the cited case are different and therefore the same is not applicable on the facts of the case on hand. 8.5.1 We…

ITO 19(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. INDIAN CORPORATE LOAN SECURITIZATION TRUST 2008 SERIES 14I, MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Goasinindian Corporate Loan Securitisation Income Tax Officer-9(3)(2) Trust- 2008 Series 14 Mumbai C/O. Il & Fs Trust Co. Ltd. Vs. 10Th Floor, “G” Block, Bkc Bandra (E), Mumbai 400051 Pan – Aaati6786P Appellant Respondent Income Tax Officer-(23)1)(2) Indian Corporate Loan [Erstwhile Ito-19(3)(2)] Securitisation Trust- 2008 Series 14 Room No. 108, Matru Mandir Vs. C/O. Il & Fs Trust Co. Ltd. Tardeo Road, Grant Road 10Th Floor, “G” Block, Bkc Mumbai 400007 Bandra (E), Mumbai 400051 Pan – Aaati6786P Appellant Respondent

…ny difference. Since this case is factually different from that of the case on hand, it is not applicable. (vii) Vellore Electric Corpn. Ltd. vs. CIT (SC) 227 ITR 557 Follows Associated Power Co. Ltd. (viii) Performing Right Society Ltd & Another vs. CIT (SC) 106 ITR 11 In this cited case the Hon'ble Apex Court held that this was a case of application of income and not diversion of income on the peculiar facts of the case and therefore the same would not be applicable to the case on hand. (ix) CIT vs. Madras Race Club (Mad.) 255 ITR 98 The facts of the cited case are different and therefore the same is not applic…