Scotts Ltd: 31 Taxman 444 (Cal), CIT v. Hyundai Heavy Industries Co Ltd.

265 CTR 109High Court#10437 most cited

What is Scotts Ltd: 31 Taxman 444 (Cal), CIT v. Hyundai Heavy Industries Co Ltd. authority for?

The case is authority for the principle that where an Indian entity is given authority to execute local work but overall responsibility remains with a foreign entity, this does not necessarily constitute a consortium, and the foreign entity's liability should be assessed based on the specific contractual terms.

10

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,315 Indian tax judgments — from 2020 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Hyundai Heavy Industries Co Ltd · 31 Taxman 444 (Cal) · section 44bbb · construction PE · agency PE · dependent agent PE · multilateral instrument · fixed place PE · make available clause · treaty benefits

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 115ASection 209(1)(d)Section 234BSection 234DSection 44BBB(1)Section 9(1)(vii)

Issues it is cited on

section 44bbbsection 209(1)multilateral instrumentdependent agent peconstruction peagency pesection 44bbfixed place pesection 44bmake available clauseinterest u/s 234ctreaty benefits

Judgments citing Scotts Ltd: 31 Taxman 444 (Cal), CIT v. Hyundai Heavy Industries Co Ltd.

Lm Wind Power As, Denmark vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle International Tax 2(2)(1), Delhi

In the result, ground raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 4280/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Lm Wind Power As, Vs, Acit, Circle Juptervej 6, 6000 Kolding, International Tax 2(2)(1), Denmark – 999999. Delhi (Pan :Aabcl8590Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate Shri Aditya Vohra, Advocate Shri Arpitgoyal, Ca Revenue By : Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 27.08.2025 Date Of Order : 21.11.2025 Order Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appealpreferred By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Assessment Order Dated 27.01.2025 Passed By The Acit, Circle Int. Tax 2(2)(1), Delhi Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act”) For Assessment Year 2020-21 Pursuant To The Directions Of The Dispute Resolution Panel U/S 144C(5) Of The Act Raising Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Assessment Order Dated 29.07.2024 Passed Under Section 143(3) Read With Section 144C(13) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (He Act") For Assessment Year 2020-21 Assessing The Total Income Of The Assessee At Rs.81,14, 14,893 Is Bad In Law, Void- Ab-Initio & Therefore, Liable To Be Quashed And/ Or Set Aside.

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 271ASection 44DSection 5Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES ‘D’: NEW DELHI. BEFORE SHRIS.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER LM Wind Power AS, vs, ACIT, Circle Juptervej 6, 6000 Kolding, International Tax 2(2)(1), Denmark – 999999. Delhi (PAN :AABCL8590Q) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate Shri Aditya Vohra, Advocate Shri ArpitGoyal, CA REVENUE BY : Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 27.08.2025 Date of Order : 21.11.2025 ORDER PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : 1. This appealpreferred by the assessee is directed against the…

Uk Grid Solutions Limited, United Kingdom vs. DCIT Circle International Tax 3(1)(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 885/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

…The Anglo French Textile Co Ltd vs CIT: 25 ITR 27 (SC), Annamalais Timber Trust and Co vs CIT: 41 ITR 781 (Mad), CIT vsBertrams Scotts Ltd: 31 Taxman 444 (Cal), CIT vs Hyundai Heavy Industries Co Ltd: 291 ITR 482 (SC), Samsung Heavy Industries Co Ltd vs DIT: 265 CTR 109 (Uttarakhand), Affirmed by the Supreme Court in 426 ITR 1(SC), DCIT vs Roxon OY: 106 ITD 489 (Mum Trib.) 10. DR however, supported the findings of Ld. Tax Authorities below and submitted that it was not a case of consortium but one consolidated bid was fragmented. was submitted that the PGCIL had invited bid and assessee was the contractor and th…

Uk Grid Solutions Limited, United Kingdom vs. DCIT Circle International Tax 3(1)(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 884/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

…The Anglo French Textile Co Ltd vs CIT: 25 ITR 27 (SC), Annamalais Timber Trust and Co vs CIT: 41 ITR 781 (Mad), CIT vsBertrams Scotts Ltd: 31 Taxman 444 (Cal), CIT vs Hyundai Heavy Industries Co Ltd: 291 ITR 482 (SC), Samsung Heavy Industries Co Ltd vs DIT: 265 CTR 109 (Uttarakhand), Affirmed by the Supreme Court in 426 ITR 1(SC), DCIT vs Roxon OY: 106 ITD 489 (Mum Trib.) 10. DR however, supported the findings of Ld. Tax Authorities below and submitted that it was not a case of consortium but one consolidated bid was fragmented. was submitted that the PGCIL had invited bid and assessee was the contractor and th…

Uk Grid Solutions Limited, United Kingdom vs. DCIT Circle Intl. Taxation 3(1)(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2240/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Mar 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

…The Anglo French Textile Co Ltd vs CIT: 25 ITR 27 (SC), Annamalais Timber Trust and Co vs CIT: 41 ITR 781 (Mad), CIT vsBertrams Scotts Ltd: 31 Taxman 444 (Cal), CIT vs Hyundai Heavy Industries Co Ltd: 291 ITR 482 (SC), Samsung Heavy Industries Co Ltd vs DIT: 265 CTR 109 (Uttarakhand), Affirmed by the Supreme Court in 426 ITR 1(SC), DCIT vs Roxon OY: 106 ITD 489 (Mum Trib.) 10. DR however, supported the findings of Ld. Tax Authorities below and submitted that it was not a case of consortium but one consolidated bid was fragmented. was submitted that the PGCIL had invited bid and assessee was the contractor and th…

Uk Grid Solutions Limited, United Kingdom vs. DCIT Circle Intl. Taxation 3(1)(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2239/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

…The Anglo French Textile Co Ltd vs CIT: 25 ITR 27 (SC), Annamalais Timber Trust and Co vs CIT: 41 ITR 781 (Mad), CIT vsBertrams Scotts Ltd: 31 Taxman 444 (Cal), CIT vs Hyundai Heavy Industries Co Ltd: 291 ITR 482 (SC), Samsung Heavy Industries Co Ltd vs DIT: 265 CTR 109 (Uttarakhand), Affirmed by the Supreme Court in 426 ITR 1(SC), DCIT vs Roxon OY: 106 ITD 489 (Mum Trib.) 10. DR however, supported the findings of Ld. Tax Authorities below and submitted that it was not a case of consortium but one consolidated bid was fragmented. was submitted that the PGCIL had invited bid and assessee was the contractor and th…

Ge Hydro France, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-1(3)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2086/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Mar 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Aditya Vohra, Adv
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 40Section 44B

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “D”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI C. N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.2085 & 2086/Del/2022 (Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20) GE Hydro France, Vs. DCIT, A-18, 1st Floor, Okhla Circle-1(3)(1), Industrial Phase-II, International Taxation, Tekhand, South East New Delhi Delhi, Okhla Industrial Estate SO, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AAFCA1688N Assessee by : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv Revenue by: Shri Aditya Vohra, Adv Shri Arpit Goel, CA Date of Hearing 15/12/2023 Date of pronouncement 13/03/2024 O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH,…

Ge Hydro France, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-1(3)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2085/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Aditya Vohra, Adv
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 40Section 44B

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “D”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI C. N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.2085 & 2086/Del/2022 (Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20) GE Hydro France, Vs. DCIT, A-18, 1st Floor, Okhla Circle-1(3)(1), Industrial Phase-II, International Taxation, Tekhand, South East New Delhi Delhi, Okhla Industrial Estate SO, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AAFCA1688N Assessee by : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv Revenue by: Shri Aditya Vohra, Adv Shri Arpit Goel, CA Date of Hearing 15/12/2023 Date of pronouncement 13/03/2024 O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH,…

Uk Grid Solution Ltd, United Kingdom vs. DCIT, Circle-3(1)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

The appeal is allowed

ITA 2088/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Apr 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. N.K.Billaiya & Sh.Anubhav Sharmaita No. 2088/Del/2022, A.Y. 2019-20 Uk Grid Solution Limited Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of St. Loeonards Building, Harry Income Tax Kerr Drive, Circle- 3(1)(1), Stafford, St16 1Wt, International Taxation United Kingdom New Delhi Pan : Aaica6271A

Section 143(3)Section 90(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘D’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SH. N.K.BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH.ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 2088/Del/2022, A.Y. 2019-20 UK Grid Solution Limited Vs. Deputy Commissioner of St. LOeonards Building, Harry Income Tax Kerr Drive, Circle- 3(1)(1), Stafford, ST16 1WT, International Taxation United Kingdom New Delhi PAN : AAICA6271A Assesseeby Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv., Aditya Vohra, Adv. & Arpit Goyal, CA Revenue by Shree Jitender Kumar, CIT(DR) Date of hearing: 09.02.2023 Date of Pronouncement: 17.04.2023 ORDER Per Anubhav Sharma, JM : The assessee h…

Uk Grid Solution Ltd, United Kingdom vs. DCIT, Circle-3(1)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

The appeal is allowed

ITA 2087/DEL/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Apr 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Sh. N.K.Billaiya & Sh.Anubhav Sharmaita No. 2087/Del/2022, A.Y. 2018-19 Uk Grid Solution Limited Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of St. Loeonards Building, Harry Income Tax Kerr Drive, Circle- 3(1)(1), Stafford, St16 1Wt, International Taxation United Kingdom New Delhi Pan : Aaica6271A

Section 143(3)Section 9Section 90(2)

…The Anglo French Textile Co Ltd vs CIT: 25 ITR 27 (SC), Annamalais Timber Trust and Co vs CIT: 41 ITR 781 (Mad), CIT vsBertrams Scotts Ltd: 31 Taxman 444 (Cal), CIT vs Hyundai Heavy Industries Co Ltd: 291 ITR 482 (SC), Samsung Heavy Industries Co Ltd vs DIT: 265 CTR 109 (Uttarakhand), Affirmed by the Supreme Court in 426 ITR 1(SC), DCIT vs Roxon OY: 106 ITD 489 (Mum Trib.) 10. Ld. DR however, supported the findings of Ld. Tax Authorities below and submitted that it was not a case of consortium but one consolidated bid was fragmented. It was submitted that the PGCIL had invited bid and assessee was the contracto…

M/S. Voith Paper Gmbh, New Delhi vs. DDIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1077/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri K.N. Charyassessment Year: 2010-11

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 5(2)Section 9

…PE in India, 20% of the net profit in respect of the Indian sale w'as held to be income attributable to the PE in India. Reliance is further placed on the recent decision of the Uttarakhand High Court in the case of Samsung Heavy Industries Co. Ltd. vs. DIT: 265 CTR 109 in judgment dated 27.12.2013. The observation of the Court on the issue of attribution of income reads as” “4. In paragraph 1 of Article 7 of the said Agreement, it has been provided that profits of an enterprise of a Contracting State shall be taxable only in that State unless the enterprise carries on business in the other Contracting State th…

Scotts Ltd: 31 Taxman 444 (Cal), CIT v. Hyundai Heavy Industries Co Ltd. (265 CTR 109) — Cited in 10 Judgments | BharatTax