Sec 40(a)(i) (viii). DCIT v. Lazard India (P.) Ltd.

42 SOT 450Income Tax Appellate Tribunal#20822 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 346,713 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2023.

Issues it is cited on

section 115ja enduring benefit section 40(a)(i)tax treaty permanent establishment section 115j revenue expenditure capital expenditure non-resident section 37(1)section 19 double taxation

Judgments citing Sec 40(a)(i) (viii). DCIT v. Lazard India (P.) Ltd.

Standard Chartered Bank, Mumbai vs. DDIT (It) 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4867/MUM/2017[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Nov 2023AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalstandard Chartered Bank Taxation Department, 23-25, M. G. Road, 3Rd Floor, Fort, Mumbai-400 001 Pan: Aabcs4681D ..... Appellant Vs. Ddit (Intl. Tax)-2(1) Scindia House, Ballard Estate, N. M. Marg, Mumbai-400 038 ..... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sant, Ld. DR

Section 14ASection 250Section 40

…on responsible for paying is required to deduct tax only if the sum is chargeable under the provision of the Act.  Further, it was claimed by the Appellant before the Ld. CIT (A) that in view of the Mumbai ITAT decisions in the case of Central Bank of India (42 SOT 450) and Citibank N.A., (ITA No. 5275/Mum/2001), even if income of Master Card was taxable in India, no tax was required to be deducted in view of Article 26(3) of India US tax treaty, which protects non-resident against any discrimination vis-à-vis residents. Article 26(3) provides that payment made to a non-resident will be deductible under the same…

M/S. Standard Chartered Bank, Mumbai vs. The DIT (I.T), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3345/MUM/2004[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Oct 2022AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blestandard Chartered Bank V. The Director Of Income-Tax (It) 3Rd Floor, Tax Department 1St Floor, Scindia House 23-25, M.G. Road, Fort N.M. Road Ballard Pier Mumbai - 400001 Mumbai - 400038 Pan: Aabcs4681D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri P.J. Pardiwala & Shri Fenil Bhatt Department Represented By : Shri. Soumendu Kumar Dash

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 37

…nder section 40(a)(i) of the Act, we place reliance on the following judicial precedents, wherein the above principles / arguments have been upheld. i. DIT (IT) vs. Citibank N.A. (2016) (66 taxmann.com 373) (Bom. HC) ii. Central Bank of India vs DCIT (2010) (42 SOT 450) (Mumbai ITAT); iii. Citibank N.A. vs. ACIT (ITA No.5275 and 5276/Mumbai /2001), and iv. Herbalife International India (P.) Ltd. Vs. ACIT (2006) (101 ITD 450). 30. In this regard Ld. AR submitted that in view of Article 26(1)&(2) of the India UK Treaty, no disallowance can be made in the hands of the PE, as it would amount to discriminating betwe…

M/S. Standard Chartered Bank, Mumbai vs. The ACIT (It)1(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 803/MUM/2009[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2022AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blestandard Chartered Bank V. Acit – Range-1(3) Taxation Department, 23-25 Scindia House, Ballard Estate M.G. Road, 3Rd Floor N.M. Marg, Mumbai - 400038 Fort, Mumbai - 400001 Pan: Aabcs4681D (Appellant) (Respondent) Adit (It)– 2(3) V. Standard Chartered Bank Room No. 120, 1St Floor Taxation Department, 23-25 Scindia House, Ballard Estate M.G. Road, 3Rd Floor N.M. Marg, Mumbai - 400038 Fort, Mumbai - 400001 Pan: Aabcs4681D (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri P.J. Pardiwala & Assessee Represented By : Shri Fenil Bhatt Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash Department Represented By :

Section 115JSection 14ASection 90Section 90(2)

…29 SOT 502 (Pune) - Sec 79 OTHER CASES-COVERED IN FAVOUR (vii). Citibank N. A. v. ACIT ITA Nos. 5275 & 5276/Mum/2001 (at para 30) (Mum) - Sec 40(a)(i) (viii). DCIT v. Lazard India (P.) Ltd - 41 SOT 72 (Mum) - Sec 40(a)(i) (ix). Central Bank of India v. DCIT - 42 SOT 450 (Mum) - Sec 40(a)(i) (x). B4U International Holdings Ltd v. DCIT - 21 taxmann.com 529 (Mum) - Sec 40(a)(i) (xi). Sandoz (P.) Ltd v. ACIT - 34 taxmann.com 280 (Mum) - Sec 40(a)(i) 20. Ld. DR relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 21. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record, we observe that Coordinate Bench in the ca…

ACIT Cir. 8(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Afcons Infrastructure Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, Department’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 4269/MUM/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jul 2016AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz, Accountant Mbmer & Shri Saktijit Dey

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistry a/wFor Respondent: Shri Jasbir Chauhan

Section 14A

…Finance Act, 2003. He, therefore, submitted in terms of Article–24, no disallowance u/s 40(a)(i) can be made. For such proposition, he relied upon the following decisions:– i) Sandoz Pvt. Ltd. v/s ACIT, 149 ITD 507 (Mum.); ii) Central Bank of India v/s DCIT, 42 SOT 450 (Mum.); and iii) Herbalife International India P. Ltd., 101 ITD 450. 27 Afcons Infrastructure Limited 33. Learned Departmental Representative on the other hand relied upon the observations of the Assessing Officer and the learned Commissioner (Appeals). 34. We have considered the submissions of the parties and perused the material available on re…