Steffen Robertson and Kirsten Consulting Engineers and Scientists v. CIT

230 ITR 206Reported decision1998#4823 most cited

What is Steffen Robertson and Kirsten Consulting Engineers and Scientists v. CIT authority for?

Expenditure is liable for TDS under section 195 if the benefit derived from it is utilized in India, irrespective of where the services were rendered or if the non-resident has a Permanent Establishment in India.

24

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2023.

Also referred to as

Steffen Robertson and Kirsten · Section 195 · TDS · non-resident · services rendered abroad · benefit utilized in India · Permanent Establishment · AAR ruling

Judgments citing Steffen Robertson and Kirsten Consulting Engineers and Scientists v. CIT

DCIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Sify Technologies Ltd., Chennai

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

ITA 439/CHNY/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jun 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Dr. M.M.Bhusari, IRS, CITFor Respondent: Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(2)Section 148Section 40

…e Appellant submits that the payment was for business services are liable to be taxed in India in the absence of a P.E. b) The learned AO ought to have appreciated that the AAR ruling in Steffen, Robertson And Kristen consulting Enginess and Scientists Vs CIT 230 ITR 206 relates to a case which involved rendering technical consultancy services. The Learned AD ought to have appreciated the facts of the case referred by him are entirely different from that of the Appellant. The decision he ought to have known related to a resident of a country with which India had no DTAA. c) The learned AO ought to have appreciate…

DCIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Sify Technologies Ltd., Chennai

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

ITA 435/CHNY/2010[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jun 2016AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Dr. M.M.Bhusari, IRS, CITFor Respondent: Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(2)Section 148Section 40

…e Appellant submits that the payment was for business services are liable to be taxed in India in the absence of a P.E. b) The learned AO ought to have appreciated that the AAR ruling in Steffen, Robertson And Kristen consulting Enginess and Scientists Vs CIT 230 ITR 206 relates to a case which involved rendering technical consultancy services. The Learned AD ought to have appreciated the facts of the case referred by him are entirely different from that of the Appellant. The decision he ought to have known related to a resident of a country with which India had no DTAA. c) The learned AO ought to have appreciate…

Director of Income Tax vs. New Skies Satellite Bv

Accordingly answered against the Revenue. The appeals fail and are dismissed, without

ITA/473/2012HC Delhi08 Feb 2016

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 260ASection 9(1)(vi)

…s and are payable to a resident of the other Contracting State, may be taxed in that other State. In other words, the general rule is that the Resident State has the right to tax royalties 5 [1998] 230 ITR 206 AAR ITA 473/2012, 474/2012, 500/2012 & 244/2014 Page 12 irrespective of the fact that they arise in the Source State. However, the Source State may also choose to tax to a ceratin limit, that limit not exceeding 15 percent of the gross amount of royalties. Royalties as used in Article 12 is defined as: “The term “royalties” as used…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/s. Laila Impex

ITTA/473/2012HC Telangana09 Jul 2013