Sanofi Pasteur Holding SA v. Department of Revenue

354 ITR 316High Court2013#2790 most cited

What is Sanofi Pasteur Holding SA v. Department of Revenue authority for?

Gains from the indirect transfer of shares in a foreign company holding Indian shares are not taxable in India under the relevant tax treaty, which is considered a self-contained code to be interpreted plainly. Creating corporate structures or special purpose vehicles for investment to secure tax benefits is a legitimate business activity.

42

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Sanofi Pasteur Holding SA · 354 ITR 316 · indirect transfer of shares · capital gains · tax treaty benefits · DTAA · Article 13(4) · Section 90 · treaty interpretation · special purpose vehicle · Azadi Bachao Andolan · tax residency certificate

Sections most often in play

Section 253Section 13(4)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 153Section 234ASection 234B

Issues it is cited on

treaty benefitstax residency certificateazadi bachao andolansection 90(2)strategic investmenttrccolourable devicetax benefitdate of transfertax treatybeneficial ownersection 90

Judgments citing Sanofi Pasteur Holding SA v. Department of Revenue

Ebay Singapore Services Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 2(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 2378/MUM/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Smt. Renu Jauhri ()

Section 143(2)Section 253

…guage of the provision, particularly in the absence of any material to suggest so. Reliance was placed on the decision of Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in case of Sanofi Pasteur Holdings SA vs. Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance reported in (2013) 354 ITR 316, wherein indirect transfers (ie. transfers of shares in foreign companies that held Indian company shares) were held to be not taxable in India in terms of the relevant tax treaty. He also relied on the decision in support of the contention that a tax treaty is a code in itself, and one cannot challenge the intent of a tax treaty unless the same…

Essar Communications Limited, Mauritius vs. ACIT, Circle-1 (2)(2), New Delhi

ITA 340/DEL/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N. Venkatraman, ASG
Section 250Section 253Section 6(3)

…countries are exempted from capital gain, certain countries are partially exempted and, in certain countries, there is nil tax on capital gains. Such factors may go in creating a corporate structure and also restructuring.”  Sanofi Pasteur Holdings SA (2013) 354 ITR 316 (AP). “(18) … No curial or academic authority is placed before us to hazard a conclusion that a corporate entity must necessarily involve itself either in manufacture or marketing/trading in/of goods or services to qualify for the ascription of being in business or commerce. Creation of wholly owned subsidiaries or joint ventures either for domes…

Essar Com Limited, Mauritius vs. ACIT, Circle 1(2)(2), New Delhi

ITA 339/DEL/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shris.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N. Venkatraman, ASG
Section 250Section 253Section 6(3)

…countries are exempted from capital gain, certain countries are partially exempted and, in certain countries, there is nil tax on capital gains. Such factors may go in creating a corporate structure and also restructuring.” Sanofi Pasteur Holdings SA (2013) 354 ITR 316 (AP). “(18) ... No curial or academic authority is placed before us to hazard a conclusion that a corporate entity must necessarily involve itself either in manufacture or marketing/trading in/of goods or services to qualify for the ascription of being in business or commerce. Creation of wholly owned subsidiaries or joint ventures either for do…

Prashant Kothari, Singapore vs. CIT A (57) Mumbai, Office of Commissioner of Appeals Mumbai

In the result, the additional ground of

ITA 5391/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2025AY 2016-17
Section 250

…ngapore) Ltd. vs DCIT [2017] 81 taxmann.com 368 (Mumbai Trib.), SET Satellite (Singapore Pve. Ltd., now known as MSM Satellite (Singapore) Pte. Ltd. vs. ADIT (MA No 520/Mum/2010), Sanofi Pasteur Holding SA vs. Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance [2013] 354 ITR 316 (Andhra Pradesh), Aroon Purie vs. CIT [2015] 375 ITR 188 (Delhi), Union of India vs. Azadi Bachao Andolan [2003] 263 ITR 706 (SC). Kasinka Trading vs. Union of India a [1995] SCC 274 and APL Co Pte. Ltd vs. ADIT [2017] 185 TTJ 305 (Mumbal-Trib.). It was submitted that the appellant should be allowed benefit of Article 13(4) of India-Singapore DTA…

The Commissioner of Income Tax - International Taxation -3 vs. Telstra Singapore Pte Ltd

ITA/334/2022HC Delhi24 Jul 2024

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 9

…es attempting to clarify or concretise any one of these meanings, (unsurprisingly the one that benefits it) enact domestic legislation which subserves such purpose. 47. In this context, recently in Sanofi Pasteur Holding SA v. Department of Revenue (2013) 354 ITR 316 (AP), the Andhra Pradesh High Court discussed and subscribed to the ratio of the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Melford Developments Inc. 82 DTC 6281 (1982) with respect to the applicability of domestic Digitally Signed By:KAMLESH KUMAR Signing Date:24.07.2024 19:47:53 Signature Not Verified ITA 334/2022 & connected mat…

The Commissioner of Income Tax - International Taxation -3 vs. Telstra Singapore Pte Ltd

ITA/206/2023HC Delhi24 Jul 2024

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 9

…es attempting to clarify or concretise any one of these meanings, (unsurprisingly the one that benefits it) enact domestic legislation which subserves such purpose. 47. In this context, recently in Sanofi Pasteur Holding SA v. Department of Revenue (2013) 354 ITR 316 (AP), the Andhra Pradesh High Court discussed and subscribed to the ratio of the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Melford Developments Inc. 82 DTC 6281 (1982) with respect to the applicability of domestic Digitally Signed By:KAMLESH KUMAR Signing Date:24.07.2024 19:47:53 Signature Not Verified ITA 334/2022 & connected mat…

The Commissioner of Income Tax - International Taxation -3 vs. Telstra Singapore Pte Ltd

ITA/61/2023HC Delhi24 Jul 2024

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 9

…es attempting to clarify or concretise any one of these meanings, (unsurprisingly the one that benefits it) enact domestic legislation which subserves such purpose. 47. In this context, recently in Sanofi Pasteur Holding SA v. Department of Revenue (2013) 354 ITR 316 (AP), the Andhra Pradesh High Court discussed and subscribed to the ratio of the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Melford Developments Inc. 82 DTC 6281 (1982) with respect to the applicability of domestic Digitally Signed By:KAMLESH KUMAR Signing Date:24.07.2024 19:47:53 Signature Not Verified ITA 334/2022 & connected mat…

The Commissioner of Income Tax - International Taxation -3 vs. Telstra Singapore Pte Ltd

ITA/55/2023HC Delhi24 Jul 2024

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 9

…es attempting to clarify or concretise any one of these meanings, (unsurprisingly the one that benefits it) enact domestic legislation which subserves such purpose. 47. In this context, recently in Sanofi Pasteur Holding SA v. Department of Revenue (2013) 354 ITR 316 (AP), the Andhra Pradesh High Court discussed and subscribed to the ratio of the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Melford Developments Inc. 82 DTC 6281 (1982) with respect to the applicability of domestic Digitally Signed By:KAMLESH KUMAR Signing Date:24.07.2024 19:47:53 Signature Not Verified ITA 334/2022 & connected mat…

Sanjeev Agrawal, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Central Circle-4, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 71/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary, (Addl.CIT)
Section 143(1)Section 250Section 4Section 5Section 6Section 90

…). • Azadi Bachao Andolan [2003] 263 ITR 70 (SC), It was held that the provisions of DTAA, with respect to cases to which they apply, would operate even if inconsistent with the provisions of the Income Tax Act. High Courts • Sanofi Pasteur Holding SA [2013] 354 ITR 316 (AP) It was held that the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement is a treaty and the provisions contained therein are expressions of sovereign policy of more than one sovereign state. Accordingly, provisions of DTAA shall override the provision of ITA. • New Skies Satellite BV [2016] 382 ITR 114 (Delhi), It was held that where the Central Government…

Dy CIT CC-1(4), Mumbai vs. M/S Grasim Industries Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 41/MUM/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri. J.D Mistry, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anil Singh
Section 115OSection 115QSection 2

…agar Power Co. and Others (1988-075-AIR-1737-SC) (Para no. 4.2.8.7, Pg. 119 to 121 of CIT(A) order) (Para 43(Pg. 228), Para 54 (Pg. 230), Para 64 (Pg. 236) and Para 68(Pg. 237), Pg. 214-246 of Legal Paper Book, Vol. I) b. Sanofi Pasteur Holding S.A. vs. DOR (354 ITR 316 AP HC) (Pg. 313 – 314, Pg. 247-365 of Legal Paper Book, Vol. I). In this case also the allegation of the Revenue was a colourable device formulated by the Assessee for avoiding capital gains tax and the Step-down subsidiary was only for the purpose of defrauding legitimate revenues. The High court, inter alia, held as under. ―Creation of wholly…

Grasim Industries Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT, Central Circle-1(4), Mumbai

ITA 1935/MUM/2020[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri. J.D Mistry, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anil Singh
Section 115OSection 115QSection 2

…agar Power Co. and Others (1988-075-AIR-1737-SC) (Para no. 4.2.8.7, Pg. 119 to 121 of CIT(A) order) (Para 43(Pg. 228), Para 54 (Pg. 230), Para 64 (Pg. 236) and Para 68(Pg. 237), Pg. 214-246 of Legal Paper Book, Vol. I) b. Sanofi Pasteur Holding S.A. vs. DOR (354 ITR 316 AP HC) (Pg. 313 – 314, Pg. 247-365 of Legal Paper Book, Vol. I). In this case also the allegation of the Revenue was a colourable device formulated by the Assessee for avoiding capital gains tax and the Step-down subsidiary was only for the purpose of defrauding legitimate revenues. The High court, inter alia, held as under. ―Creation of wholly…

Cgi Information Systems and Management Consultants Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation), Circle-1(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 737/BANG/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Apr 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri. Chavali Narayan, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Ramesh Kumar, Addl. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 154Section 201Section 201(1)Section 206ASection 90

…n the case of Azadi Bachao Andolan (2003) 263 ITR 706 (SC), whereby it was held that DTAA, even if inconsistent, will prevail over the Act. Reliance was also placed on the decisions of the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Sanofi Pasteur (2013) 354 ITR 316 (AP) wherein it was observed that DTAA being a sovereign matter, the machinery provisions cannot override or control that. Reliance was also placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Kaushallaya Bai and others (2012) 346 ITR 156 (Kar) wherein it has held that the provisions of section 206AA are to be read down. 7.…

Dabur Invest Corp, New Delhi vs. JCIT, Range-46, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 8058/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Feb 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Partially Through Video Conferencing) Dabur Invest Corp, The Joint Commissioner Of Vs. 4Th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, 10, Income Tax , Rouse Avenue, New Delhi Range-46, Pan: Aaadfd2529G New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri M. P. Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri G. C. Srivastava, Adv
Section 143Section 4

…the market value or the purchasing of shares at a price more than the market value Page 85 of 155 shows that the investment in shares is on capital account: 41 ITR 534 (SC) Ram Narain & Sons Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT 131 ITR 445 (MP) Smt. Maharani Usha Devi vs. CIT 354 ITR 316 (AP) Sanofi Pasteur Holding SA vs. Dept of Rev. 368 ITR 1 (Bom) Vodafone India Services Pvt. Ltd. vs. UOI 263 CTR 48 (Bom) Accra Investment Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO 6.4 The contention of the Revenue that because option price being received annually is a revenue receipt is not correct. In fact, the periodicity of the payment is not a criteria to decide…

DCIT (International Taxation), New Delhi vs. M/S. Telstra Singapore Pte Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and appeal

ITA 6733/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Shri N.K.Billaiya, Am [Through Video Conferencing]

For Appellant: Sh. S.K.Aggarwal, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Satpal Gulati, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144(3)Section 144CSection 9

…e in the Tax Treaty which is applicable in the Appellant's case. 1.4 That the learned AO erred in facts and in law by not following the decision of the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Sanofi Pasteur Holding SA vs Department of Revenue [2013] [354 ITR 316] which correctly holds that the retrospective amendments to the Act cannot be read as an amendment to the tax treaties by virtue of Article 3(2) of the tax treaties. While the judgment of the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court was in the context of India France tax treaty, the learned AO has failed to appreciate that the rationale of the said judg…

M/S Telstra Singapore Pte. Ltd., Singapore vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and appeal

ITA 286/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Shri N.K.Billaiya, Am [Through Video Conferencing]

For Appellant: Sh. S.K.Aggarwal, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Satpal Gulati, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144(3)Section 144CSection 9

…e in the Tax Treaty which is applicable in the Appellant's case. 1.4 That the learned AO erred in facts and in law by not following the decision of the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Sanofi Pasteur Holding SA vs Department of Revenue [2013] [354 ITR 316] which correctly holds that the retrospective amendments to the Act cannot be read as an amendment to the tax treaties by virtue of Article 3(2) of the tax treaties. While the judgment of the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court was in the context of India France tax treaty, the learned AO has failed to appreciate that the rationale of the said judg…

Telstra Singapore Pte. Ltd, New Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, New Delhi

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and appeal

ITA 1548/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Shri N.K.Billaiya, Am [Through Video Conferencing]

For Appellant: Sh. S.K.Aggarwal, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Satpal Gulati, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144(3)Section 144CSection 9

…e in the Tax Treaty which is applicable in the Appellant's case. 1.4 That the learned AO erred in facts and in law by not following the decision of the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Sanofi Pasteur Holding SA vs Department of Revenue [2013] [354 ITR 316] which correctly holds that the retrospective amendments to the Act cannot be read as an amendment to the tax treaties by virtue of Article 3(2) of the tax treaties. While the judgment of the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court was in the context of India France tax treaty, the learned AO has failed to appreciate that the rationale of the said judg…

Telstra Singapore Pte. Ltd, Singapore vs. DCIT (International Taxation), New Delhi

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and appeal

ITA 3020/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Shri N.K.Billaiya, Am [Through Video Conferencing]

For Appellant: Sh. S.K.Aggarwal, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Satpal Gulati, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144(3)Section 144CSection 9

…e in the Tax Treaty which is applicable in the Appellant's case. 1.4 That the learned AO erred in facts and in law by not following the decision of the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Sanofi Pasteur Holding SA vs Department of Revenue [2013] [354 ITR 316] which correctly holds that the retrospective amendments to the Act cannot be read as an amendment to the tax treaties by virtue of Article 3(2) of the tax treaties. While the judgment of the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court was in the context of India France tax treaty, the learned AO has failed to appreciate that the rationale of the said judg…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, (International Taxation), Circle- 1(1), Bangalore vs. M/S. Edgeverve Systems Limited, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals are dismissed

ITA 12/BANG/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Sept 2020AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri. Sudheendra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.R.Premi, JCIT , DR(ITAT)
Section 195Section 206ASection 248

…n the case of Azadi Bachao Andolan (2003) 263 ITR 706 (SC), whereby it was held that DTAA, even if inconsistent, will prevail over the Act. Reliance was also placed on the decisions of the Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Sanofi Pasteur (2013) 354 ITR 316 (AP) wherein it was observed that DTAA being a sovereign matter, the machinery provisions cannot override or control that. Reliance was also placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Kaushallaya Bai and others (2012) 346 ITR 156 (Kar) wherein it has held that the provisions of section 206AA are to be read down. 8.…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, (International Taxation), Circle - 1(1), Bangalore vs. M/S. Edgeverve Systems Limited, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals are dismissed

ITA 13/BANG/2020[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Sept 2020AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri. Sudheendra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.R.Premi, JCIT , DR(ITAT)
Section 195Section 206ASection 248

…n the case of Azadi Bachao Andolan (2003) 263 ITR 706 (SC), whereby it was held that DTAA, even if inconsistent, will prevail over the Act. Reliance was also placed on the decisions of the Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Sanofi Pasteur (2013) 354 ITR 316 (AP) wherein it was observed that DTAA being a sovereign matter, the machinery provisions cannot override or control that. Reliance was also placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Kaushallaya Bai and others (2012) 346 ITR 156 (Kar) wherein it has held that the provisions of section 206AA are to be read down. 8.…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation) Circle-1(2), Bangalore vs. M/S Honeywell Technologies Solutions Lab Pvt Ltd, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1418/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Aug 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevanand Shri B.R. Baskaran, Accoutant Member It(It)A Nos.562 To 564/Bang/2017 Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2013-14

For Appellant: ShriFor Respondent: Smt. Shreya Loyalka, A.R
Section 201(1)Section 206A

…IT(IT)A Nos.562 to 564 & IT(IT)A No.1418 of 2018 M/s. Honeywell Technology Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENTAND SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUTANT MEMBER IT(IT)A Nos.562 to 564/Bang/2017 Assessment Years : 2011-12 to 2013-14 M/s. Honeywell Technology Deputy Commissioner of Solutions Ltd. Income-tax Circle-2(1) 151/1, Bannergatta, International Taxation Vs. Doraisanipalya Bangalore Bangalore-560 076 PAN NO : AAACH4151J APPELLANT RESPONDENT IT(IT)A No.1418/Bang/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Deputy Vs. M/s. Honeywell…

Sanofi Pasteur Holding SA v. Department of Revenue (354 ITR 316) — Cited in 42 Judgments | BharatTax