S India(P)Ltd. v. CIT

287 ITR 421Reported decision2006#3675 most cited

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

The court determined that the label 'reimbursement' in an agreement does not determine the true nature of payments under a secondment agreement. Such payments must possess the characteristics of actual reimbursement to be treated as such, and the term itself is not decisive.

32

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

S India(P)Ltd. v. CIT · 287 ITR 421 · section 195 · secondment agreement · reimbursement · nature of payments · withholding tax

Sections most often in play

Section 195Section 201(1)Section 201(1A)Section 40(a)(i)Section 9(1)(vii)

Issues it is cited on

section 192(1)place of effective managementsection 203section 9(1)(ii)section 44daservice pesection 44dfees for included servicessection 9(1)(v)section 6(1)section 192interest under section 201(1a)

Judgments citing S India(P)Ltd. v. CIT

M/S. Goldman Sachs Services Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle- 1(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for all the years under consideration stands allowed

ITA 363/BANG/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(It)A Nos. 362 To 369 & 338 To 345/Bang/2020 Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2014-15 & 2015-16 To 2018-19 M/S. Goldman Sachs Services Pvt. Ltd., The Deputy Wing A, Wing B & Commissioner Of Ground Floor To 6Th Floor Income Tax, Of Wing C, International Helios Business Park, Taxation, 150 Outer Ring, Vs. Circle 1 (1), Kadubeesanahalli, Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 103. Pan:Aaccg2435N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sharath Rao, Ca : Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, Revenue By Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 09-03-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 29-04-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against Following Orders, Passed By The Ld. Dcit, International Taxation, Circle – 1(1), Bangalore Independently, Under Section 201(1) & 201(1A) Of The Act, For The Assessment Years Under Consideration As Under:

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, CA
Section 192(1)Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)

…as the employees continue to have lien on his employment with the entity which deputes him. Entity seconding the employee is the employer as it retained the right over seconded employee is also held by Hon’ble AAR in case of AT & S India Pvt Ltd., reported in 287 ITR 421. 29.5 The observations of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Morgan Stanley (supra) were in the context of existence of service PE. This is clear from a reading of the relevant portion of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, which is as follows:- “As regards the question of deputation, an employee of MSCo when deputed to MSAS does not…

M/S. Goldman Sachs Services Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle- 1(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for all the years under consideration stands allowed

ITA 362/BANG/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(It)A Nos. 362 To 369 & 338 To 345/Bang/2020 Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2014-15 & 2015-16 To 2018-19 M/S. Goldman Sachs Services Pvt. Ltd., The Deputy Wing A, Wing B & Commissioner Of Ground Floor To 6Th Floor Income Tax, Of Wing C, International Helios Business Park, Taxation, 150 Outer Ring, Vs. Circle 1 (1), Kadubeesanahalli, Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 103. Pan:Aaccg2435N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sharath Rao, Ca : Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, Revenue By Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 09-03-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 29-04-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against Following Orders, Passed By The Ld. Dcit, International Taxation, Circle – 1(1), Bangalore Independently, Under Section 201(1) & 201(1A) Of The Act, For The Assessment Years Under Consideration As Under:

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, CA
Section 192(1)Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)

…as the employees continue to have lien on his employment with the entity which deputes him. Entity seconding the employee is the employer as it retained the right over seconded employee is also held by Hon’ble AAR in case of AT & S India Pvt Ltd., reported in 287 ITR 421. 29.5 The observations of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Morgan Stanley (supra) were in the context of existence of service PE. This is clear from a reading of the relevant portion of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, which is as follows:- “As regards the question of deputation, an employee of MSCo when deputed to MSAS does not…

DCIT- 11 (3)(1), Mumbai vs. Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 361/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jan 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd., V. Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax 3Rd Floor, The Leela Galleria Circle – 11(3)(1) Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri (E) Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai – 400 059 Mumbai – 400 020 Pan: Aaace2175M (Appellant) (Respondent) Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax V. M/S. Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd., 3Rd Floor, The Leela Galleria Circle – 11(3)(1) Room No. 204, 2Nd Floor Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri (E) Mumbai – 400 059 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai – 400 020 Pan: Aaace2175M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Niraj ShethFor Respondent: Shri Amit Pratap Singh
Section 195Section 234DSection 244ASection 40Section 9(1)(vii)

…so. "2 Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in not appreciating the decision of the Hon'ble ARR in the case of Verizon Data Services India P. Ltd. (ARR No. 856/2010) and AT & S India P. Ltd. (2006) 287 ITR 421 wherein it was held that the reimbursement is in nature of FTS and the fact that taxes are paid under the head 'Salaries' is of no consequence. 3. The appellant prays that the order of the Ld.CIT(A) on the above grounds be set-aside and that of the A.O be restored.” 12. Ground Nos. 1 & 2 of grounds of appeal, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitt…

Total Oil India P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir 11(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 245/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jan 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd., V. Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax 3Rd Floor, The Leela Galleria Circle – 11(3)(1) Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri (E) Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai – 400 059 Mumbai – 400 020 Pan: Aaace2175M (Appellant) (Respondent) Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax V. M/S. Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd., 3Rd Floor, The Leela Galleria Circle – 11(3)(1) Room No. 204, 2Nd Floor Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri (E) Mumbai – 400 059 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai – 400 020 Pan: Aaace2175M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Niraj ShethFor Respondent: Shri Amit Pratap Singh
Section 195Section 234DSection 244ASection 40Section 9(1)(vii)

…so. "2 Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in not appreciating the decision of the Hon'ble ARR in the case of Verizon Data Services India P. Ltd. (ARR No. 856/2010) and AT & S India P. Ltd. (2006) 287 ITR 421 wherein it was held that the reimbursement is in nature of FTS and the fact that taxes are paid under the head 'Salaries' is of no consequence. 3. The appellant prays that the order of the Ld.CIT(A) on the above grounds be set-aside and that of the A.O be restored.” 12. Ground Nos. 1 & 2 of grounds of appeal, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitt…

ACIT Cir 11(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Total Oil India P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed as indicated above and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2128/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jan 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Niraj ShethFor Respondent: Shri Avaneesh Tiwari
Section 195Section 234DSection 40Section 9(1)(vii)

…s failed to do so. "4. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in ignoring the decision of the Hon'ble ARR in the case of Verizon Data Services India P. Ltd. (ARR No. 856/2010) and AT & S India P. Ltd. (2006) 287 ITR 421 wherein it was held that the reimbursement is in nature of FTS and the fact that taxes are paid under the head 'Salaries' is of no consequence. 5. The appellant prays that the order of the Ld.CIT(A) on the above grounds be set-aside and that of the A.O be restored.” 12. Ground Nos. 1 and 2 of grounds of appeal relates to disallowance of demurrag…

Asst CIT Range 11(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Total Oil India P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed as indicated above and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2127/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jan 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Niraj ShethFor Respondent: Shri Avaneesh Tiwari
Section 195Section 234DSection 40Section 9(1)(vii)

…s failed to do so. "4. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in ignoring the decision of the Hon'ble ARR in the case of Verizon Data Services India P. Ltd. (ARR No. 856/2010) and AT & S India P. Ltd. (2006) 287 ITR 421 wherein it was held that the reimbursement is in nature of FTS and the fact that taxes are paid under the head 'Salaries' is of no consequence. 5. The appellant prays that the order of the Ld.CIT(A) on the above grounds be set-aside and that of the A.O be restored.” 12. Ground Nos. 1 and 2 of grounds of appeal relates to disallowance of demurrag…

Total Oil India P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir 11(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed as indicated above and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1878/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jan 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Niraj ShethFor Respondent: Shri Avaneesh Tiwari
Section 195Section 234DSection 40Section 9(1)(vii)

…s failed to do so. "4. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in ignoring the decision of the Hon'ble ARR in the case of Verizon Data Services India P. Ltd. (ARR No. 856/2010) and AT & S India P. Ltd. (2006) 287 ITR 421 wherein it was held that the reimbursement is in nature of FTS and the fact that taxes are paid under the head 'Salaries' is of no consequence. 5. The appellant prays that the order of the Ld.CIT(A) on the above grounds be set-aside and that of the A.O be restored.” 12. Ground Nos. 1 and 2 of grounds of appeal relates to disallowance of demurrag…

Total Oil India P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir 11(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed as indicated above and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1877/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jan 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Niraj ShethFor Respondent: Shri Avaneesh Tiwari
Section 195Section 234DSection 40Section 9(1)(vii)

…s failed to do so. "4. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in ignoring the decision of the Hon'ble ARR in the case of Verizon Data Services India P. Ltd. (ARR No. 856/2010) and AT & S India P. Ltd. (2006) 287 ITR 421 wherein it was held that the reimbursement is in nature of FTS and the fact that taxes are paid under the head 'Salaries' is of no consequence. 5. The appellant prays that the order of the Ld.CIT(A) on the above grounds be set-aside and that of the A.O be restored.” 12. Ground Nos. 1 and 2 of grounds of appeal relates to disallowance of demurrag…

ACIT 11(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Total Oil India P.Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 4300/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Vp & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Niraj ShethFor Respondent: Shri S. Usmani (DR)
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 195Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)Section 9(1)(vii)

…hat TUS ought to have been deducted u/s 195 by the appellant. 9.2 The AO has relied on the decision of AAR in the case of Verizon Data Services India Pvt I.td (AAR No. 865 of 2010), Centrica Offshore Pvt Ltd (AAR No. 856 of 2010) and AT&S India Pvt Ltd [2006) 287 ITR 421 wherein it has been held that reimbursement is in the nature of FTS and the fact that taxes are paid under head 'Salaries' is of no consequence. 9.3 The submission made by the appellant on this issue is summarized as below; 9.3.1 The Appellant had availed services of personnel/employees who were oil payrolls of its Associated Enterprises ('AE'),…

Total Oil India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 8(3), Mumbai

ITA 4135/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Vp & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Niraj ShethFor Respondent: Shri S. Usmani (DR)
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 195Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)Section 9(1)(vii)

…hat TUS ought to have been deducted u/s 195 by the appellant. 9.2 The AO has relied on the decision of AAR in the case of Verizon Data Services India Pvt I.td (AAR No. 865 of 2010), Centrica Offshore Pvt Ltd (AAR No. 856 of 2010) and AT&S India Pvt Ltd [2006) 287 ITR 421 wherein it has been held that reimbursement is in the nature of FTS and the fact that taxes are paid under head 'Salaries' is of no consequence. 9.3 The submission made by the appellant on this issue is summarized as below; 9.3.1 The Appellant had availed services of personnel/employees who were oil payrolls of its Associated Enterprises ('AE'),…

ITO, Bangalore vs. M/S Cerner Health Care Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1509/BANG/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Sept 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Jason P. Boazi.T.(T.P.)A.No.1509/Bang/2012 Assessment Year 2008-2009 The Income Tax Officer M/S. Cerner Health Care Ward 11(1), Bangalore. Vs. Solutions P. Ltd., Bangalore – 560 034. Pan Aaccc3795R (Appellant) (Respondent) For Revenue : Mr. P.K. Srihari For Assessee : Mr. Chavali Narayan Date Of Hearing : 28.07.2015 Date Of Pronouncement : 4.9.2015 Order Per Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, J.M. This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-I, Bangalore Dated 31.08.2012 For The A.Y. 2008-2009 In Granting Relief To The Assessee By Deleting The Disallowances Made By The A.O. Under Section 40(A)(Ia) Of The Act As Well As Section 10A Of The Act.

For Appellant: Mr. Chavali NarayanFor Respondent: Mr. P.K. Srihari
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 195Section 40

…ty of the seconded employee. It is not usual to find such a stipulation in an agreement for rendering technical services. 14. The Department has drawn our attention to the ruling of the Authority for Advance Rulings in the case of AT & S India P. Ltd., (2006) 287 ITR 421. In this case the agreement entered into by the Indian company with its Austrian parent company was titled "Foreign Collaboration Agreement". Article 4 of the agreement obliged the Austrian company to provide all assistance and cooperation to the Indian company in its venture by providing appropriate support technology. Article 4.2 required the A…

Deputy Director of Income Tax, (International Taxation), Bangalore vs. M/S Carl Zeiss India P Ltd, Bangalore

In the result, the revenue’s appeal and cross objection of the

ITA 1251/BANG/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Jason P Boaz

For Respondent: Shri Krishnan Narayanan, CA
Section 195(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH ‘B’, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JASON P BOAZ, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(IT)A No.1251(B)/2014 (Assessment year : 2009-10) The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, (International Taxation) Circle-1(1)Room No.604, Nrupathunga Road, Bangalore-560 001 Appellant Vs M/s Carl Zeiss India (P)Ltd. India Branch Office, Plot No.3, Jigani Link Road, Bangalore-560 099 PAN No.AABCC 1589Q Respondent And IT(IT)A No.1258(B)/2014 (Assessment year : 2009-10) M/s Carl Zeiss India (P)Ltd. India Branch Office, Plot No.3, Jigani Link Road, Bangalore-5…