Rajeev Sureshbhai Gajwani v. ACIT

8 ITR 616Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2011#5631 most cited

What is Rajeev Sureshbhai Gajwani v. ACIT authority for?

A different treatment of a foreign enterprise compared to a domestic enterprise is sufficient to invoke the non-discrimination clause of a tax treaty.

21

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Rajeev Sureshbhai Gajwani · ACIT · 137 TTJ 1 · non-discrimination clause · tax treaty · foreign enterprise · different treatment

Also reported as

137 TTJ 18 ITR (Trib) 616129 ITD 145

Issues it is cited on

enduring benefitsection 40(a)(i)section 260tax treatypermanent establishmentcapital expendituresection 37(1)section 37section 14asection 154section 10section 26

Judgments citing Rajeev Sureshbhai Gajwani v. ACIT

M/S. Honda Cars India Ltd., Uttar Pradesh vs. DCIT (Ltu), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2056/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri J. Sudhakar Reddyassessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 40

…Pune Bench of the ITAT in Automated Securities Clearance Inc. v. Income Tax Officer (supra)is no assistance to the Revenue since the said decision is said to be overruled by the Special Bench of the ITAT in the case of Rajeev Sureshbhai Gajwani vs ACIT (2011) 8 ITR (Trib) 616 (Ahmedabad). 61. In light of the above discussion, question (b) is answered in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the Assessee and against the Revenue by holding that Section 40 (a) (i) of the Act is discriminatory and therefore, not applicable in terms of Article 26 (3) of the Indo-US DTAA. 62. Accordingly, question (a) is answered in the…