What is Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan authority for?

A citizen is free to carry on business within the law, and mere tax planning without a motive to evade taxes through colorable devices is not frowned upon. The liability to taxation, for the purpose of tax treaty application, is a legal situation, not the fiscal fact of actual payment.

How many judgments cite Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan?

691 judgments on BharatTax cite Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan (263 ITR 706), spanning 2008 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 139(1), Section 90, Section 234B, Section 143(2), Section 143(1).

Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan (263 ITR 706)

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Sunil Haripant Pophale, Nashik

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

ITA 448/PUN/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.322/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Mr. Sunil Haripant Pophale, C/O Vadivarhe Specialty Chemicals Ltd., Gat No.204, Nashik Mumbai Highway, Vadivarhe, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Nashik – 422403 …. Pan: Aahpp4573G Vs. The Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Range – 2, Nashik आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.448/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Circle – 2, Nashik …. Vs. Mr. Sunil Haripant Pophale, C/O Vadivarhe Specialty Chemicals Ltd., Gat No.204, Nashik Mumbai Highway, Vadivarhe, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Nashik – 422403 Pan: Aahpp4573G आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.301/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Smt. Sunita Ajay Ramnathkar, 22, Parijat, 95 Marine Drive, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Mumbai – 400002 …. Pan: Aafpr1193J Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle – 2, Nashik

For Appellant: Shri Sunil PathakFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Prasad, CIT

Section 143(3)

…al loss against capital gains shown by the assessee on sale of another set of shares, then is it a case of tax planning or tax avoidance. ITA Nos.301 & 447/PUN/2014 24. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India & Anr. Vs. Azadi Bachao Andolan & Anr. (2003) 263 ITR 706 (SC) held that citizen is free to carry on his business within four corners of law and mere tax planning without any motive to avoid taxes through colourable device is not frowned upon. The Apex Court further held that the principle laid down in Mc Dowell & Co. Ltd. Vs. Commercial Tax Officer (supra) relied upon by the learned Departmental Repres…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Smt. Sunita Ajay Ramnathkar, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

ITA 447/PUN/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.322/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Mr. Sunil Haripant Pophale, C/O Vadivarhe Specialty Chemicals Ltd., Gat No.204, Nashik Mumbai Highway, Vadivarhe, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Nashik – 422403 …. Pan: Aahpp4573G Vs. The Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Range – 2, Nashik आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.448/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Circle – 2, Nashik …. Vs. Mr. Sunil Haripant Pophale, C/O Vadivarhe Specialty Chemicals Ltd., Gat No.204, Nashik Mumbai Highway, Vadivarhe, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Nashik – 422403 Pan: Aahpp4573G आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.301/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Smt. Sunita Ajay Ramnathkar, 22, Parijat, 95 Marine Drive, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Mumbai – 400002 …. Pan: Aafpr1193J Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle – 2, Nashik

For Appellant: Shri Sunil PathakFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Prasad, CIT

Section 143(3)

…al loss against capital gains shown by the assessee on sale of another set of shares, then is it a case of tax planning or tax avoidance. ITA Nos.301 & 447/PUN/2014 24. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India & Anr. Vs. Azadi Bachao Andolan & Anr. (2003) 263 ITR 706 (SC) held that citizen is free to carry on his business within four corners of law and mere tax planning without any motive to avoid taxes through colourable device is not frowned upon. The Apex Court further held that the principle laid down in Mc Dowell & Co. Ltd. Vs. Commercial Tax Officer (supra) relied upon by the learned Departmental Repres…

Sunil Haripant Pophale, Nashik vs. Joint Commissioner of Inocme-Tax

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

ITA 322/PUN/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.322/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Mr. Sunil Haripant Pophale, C/O Vadivarhe Specialty Chemicals Ltd., Gat No.204, Nashik Mumbai Highway, Vadivarhe, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Nashik – 422403 …. Pan: Aahpp4573G Vs. The Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Range – 2, Nashik आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.448/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Circle – 2, Nashik …. Vs. Mr. Sunil Haripant Pophale, C/O Vadivarhe Specialty Chemicals Ltd., Gat No.204, Nashik Mumbai Highway, Vadivarhe, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Nashik – 422403 Pan: Aahpp4573G आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.301/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Smt. Sunita Ajay Ramnathkar, 22, Parijat, 95 Marine Drive, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Mumbai – 400002 …. Pan: Aafpr1193J Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle – 2, Nashik

For Appellant: Shri Sunil PathakFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Prasad, CIT

Section 143(3)

…al loss against capital gains shown by the assessee on sale of another set of shares, then is it a case of tax planning or tax avoidance. ITA Nos.301 & 447/PUN/2014 24. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India & Anr. Vs. Azadi Bachao Andolan & Anr. (2003) 263 ITR 706 (SC) held that citizen is free to carry on his business within four corners of law and mere tax planning without any motive to avoid taxes through colourable device is not frowned upon. The Apex Court further held that the principle laid down in Mc Dowell & Co. Ltd. Vs. Commercial Tax Officer (supra) relied upon by the learned Departmental Repres…

Smt. Sunita Ajay Ramnathkar, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

ITA 301/PUN/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.322/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Mr. Sunil Haripant Pophale, C/O Vadivarhe Specialty Chemicals Ltd., Gat No.204, Nashik Mumbai Highway, Vadivarhe, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Nashik – 422403 …. Pan: Aahpp4573G Vs. The Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Range – 2, Nashik आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.448/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Circle – 2, Nashik …. Vs. Mr. Sunil Haripant Pophale, C/O Vadivarhe Specialty Chemicals Ltd., Gat No.204, Nashik Mumbai Highway, Vadivarhe, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Nashik – 422403 Pan: Aahpp4573G आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.301/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Smt. Sunita Ajay Ramnathkar, 22, Parijat, 95 Marine Drive, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Mumbai – 400002 …. Pan: Aafpr1193J Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle – 2, Nashik

For Appellant: Shri Sunil PathakFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Prasad, CIT

Section 143(3)

…al loss against capital gains shown by the assessee on sale of another set of shares, then is it a case of tax planning or tax avoidance. ITA Nos.301 & 447/PUN/2014 24. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India & Anr. Vs. Azadi Bachao Andolan & Anr. (2003) 263 ITR 706 (SC) held that citizen is free to carry on his business within four corners of law and mere tax planning without any motive to avoid taxes through colourable device is not frowned upon. The Apex Court further held that the principle laid down in Mc Dowell & Co. Ltd. Vs. Commercial Tax Officer (supra) relied upon by the learned Departmental Repres…

M3M India Holdings, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 2, Faridabad

In the result, Ground No.3 of the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 2691/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Bharath JanartharanFor Respondent: Smt. Paramita Tripathi, CIT-D.R

Section 132(1)(A)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153DSection 234B

…//FIT FOR PUBLICATION// LP BS A.M. J.M. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES “F” : DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.No.2691/Del./2018 Assessment Year 2012-2013 M/s. M3M India Holdings (Formerly M/s. Krishna The DCIT, Flexi Solution), C-13, vs. Central Circle-II, Sushant Lok-I, Gurgaon. Haryana – 122 002. Faridabad. PAN AATFM5860D (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr.Advocate. Shri Rohit Jain, And For Assessee : Shri Bharath Janartharan Advocates. For Revenue : Smt. Paramita Tripathi, CIT-D.R. Date of Hearing : 07.02.2019 Date of Pr…

The Dy. DIT (Exemption), Circle-1, Ahmedabad vs. Friends of Wwb India, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the revenue and cross objection of the assesseee both are dismissed

ITA 1608/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay R. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Dev, Sr. D.R

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

…nned there is nothing to impeach the genuineness of the transaction. With regard to the ruling in McDowell and Co. Ltd. v. CTO [1985] 154: ITR 148 (SC), it may be stated that in the later decision of this court in Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan [2003] 263 ITR 706 it has been held that a citizen is free to carry on its business within the four corners of the law. That, mere tax planning, without any motive to evade taxes through colourable devices is not frowned upon even by the judgment of this court in McDowell and Co. Ltd.'s case (supra).” 14. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Mrs. Sarita P.…

John Deere Eqipment P. Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Director of Income-Tax

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 908/PUN/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jan 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.905 & 906/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2007-08 & 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: S/Shri Ajay Modi, Pankaj Garg and Sudhendu Das

Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vi)

…ects in the enforcement of treaties is one such attempt, which falls just short of a breach, but is nevertheless, in the opinion of this court, indefensible.‖ 18. Referring to the decision of Apex Court in Union of India Vs. Azadi Bachao Andolan & Arn. (2003) 263 ITR 706 (SC) and The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969, the Hon‘ble High Court held the amendments to a treaty must be brought about by an agreement between the parties. Unilateral amendments to treaties are therefore, categorically prohibited. The Hon‘ble High Court held that the words in the treaty would be controlled by definition of thos…

John Deere Eqipment P. Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Director of Income-Tax

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 907/PUN/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jan 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.905 & 906/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2007-08 & 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: S/Shri Ajay Modi, Pankaj Garg and Sudhendu Das

Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vi)

…ects in the enforcement of treaties is one such attempt, which falls just short of a breach, but is nevertheless, in the opinion of this court, indefensible.‖ 18. Referring to the decision of Apex Court in Union of India Vs. Azadi Bachao Andolan & Arn. (2003) 263 ITR 706 (SC) and The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969, the Hon‘ble High Court held the amendments to a treaty must be brought about by an agreement between the parties. Unilateral amendments to treaties are therefore, categorically prohibited. The Hon‘ble High Court held that the words in the treaty would be controlled by definition of thos…

John Deere India Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Director of Income-Tax

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 906/PUN/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jan 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.905 & 906/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2007-08 & 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: S/Shri Ajay Modi, Pankaj Garg and Sudhendu Das

Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vi)

…ects in the enforcement of treaties is one such attempt, which falls just short of a breach, but is nevertheless, in the opinion of this court, indefensible.‖ 18. Referring to the decision of Apex Court in Union of India Vs. Azadi Bachao Andolan & Arn. (2003) 263 ITR 706 (SC) and The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969, the Hon‘ble High Court held the amendments to a treaty must be brought about by an agreement between the parties. Unilateral amendments to treaties are therefore, categorically prohibited. The Hon‘ble High Court held that the words in the treaty would be controlled by definition of thos…

John Deere India Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Director of Income-Tax

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 905/PUN/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jan 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.905 & 906/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2007-08 & 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: S/Shri Ajay Modi, Pankaj Garg and Sudhendu Das

Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vi)

…ects in the enforcement of treaties is one such attempt, which falls just short of a breach, but is nevertheless, in the opinion of this court, indefensible.‖ 18. Referring to the decision of Apex Court in Union of India Vs. Azadi Bachao Andolan & Arn. (2003) 263 ITR 706 (SC) and The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969, the Hon‘ble High Court held the amendments to a treaty must be brought about by an agreement between the parties. Unilateral amendments to treaties are therefore, categorically prohibited. The Hon‘ble High Court held that the words in the treaty would be controlled by definition of thos…

Uma Singal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Centrl Circle-3, New Delhi

ITA 1484/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Dec 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S S Rana CIT DR

Section 10(38)Section 143Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ―G‖: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1415 to 1417/Del/2018 (Assessment Year: 2013-14 to 2015-16) Shri Brij Bhushan Singal, Vs. ACIT, W-29, Greater Kailash Part-II, Central Circle-3, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No. 1483 & 1484/Del/2018 (Assessment Year: 2013-14, and 2014-15) Mrs. Uma Singal, Vs. ACIT, W-29, Greater Kailash Part-II, Central Circle-3, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No. 1479 to 1481/Del/2018 (Assessment Year: 2013-14 to 2015-16) Mrs. Ritu Si…

Ritu Singal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 3, New Delhi

ITA 1481/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Dec 2018AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S S Rana CIT DR

Section 10(38)Section 143Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ―G‖: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1415 to 1417/Del/2018 (Assessment Year: 2013-14 to 2015-16) Shri Brij Bhushan Singal, Vs. ACIT, W-29, Greater Kailash Part-II, Central Circle-3, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No. 1483 & 1484/Del/2018 (Assessment Year: 2013-14, and 2014-15) Mrs. Uma Singal, Vs. ACIT, W-29, Greater Kailash Part-II, Central Circle-3, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No. 1479 to 1481/Del/2018 (Assessment Year: 2013-14 to 2015-16) Mrs. Ritu Si…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Jaipur vs. M/S. Angel Infrastructure Private Limited, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the

ITA 761/JPR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Dec 2018AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta

Section 147Section 151

…lhi High Court dated 20/01/2010 in the case of CIT Vs. Shri Chand Ratan Bagri in ITA No. 31/2010. The ld counsel has also relied upon the following decisions: (i) Shree Minakshi Mills Ltd. Vs. CIT 31 ITR 28 (SC) (ii) Union of India Vs Aazadi Bachao Andolan 263 ITR 706 (SC) Thus, the ld counsel has submitted that the transaction is to be tested as per the provisions of Section 45 of the Act and not U/s 28 to 41 of the Act. Therefore, the aspect of commercial substance is not relevant for the transaction of transfer of capital asset. No incriminating material or fact was found or detected during the survey U/s…

M/S Angel Infrastructure (P) Ltd., Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the

ITA 464/JPR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Dec 2018AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta

Section 147Section 151

…lhi High Court dated 20/01/2010 in the case of CIT Vs. Shri Chand Ratan Bagri in ITA No. 31/2010. The ld counsel has also relied upon the following decisions: (i) Shree Minakshi Mills Ltd. Vs. CIT 31 ITR 28 (SC) (ii) Union of India Vs Aazadi Bachao Andolan 263 ITR 706 (SC) Thus, the ld counsel has submitted that the transaction is to be tested as per the provisions of Section 45 of the Act and not U/s 28 to 41 of the Act. Therefore, the aspect of commercial substance is not relevant for the transaction of transfer of capital asset. No incriminating material or fact was found or detected during the survey U/s…

M/S Kei Industries Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO (International Taxation), New Delhi

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

ITA 6400/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Ms Gargi Sethee, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Ashima Neb, Sr. DR

Section 195Section 200ASection 201Section 206Section 206ASection 90(2)

…r under reference at the rates applicable to the non- resident in India as per the provisions of the DTAA and Section 206AA of the Act cannot override section 90(2) of the Act. He placed reliance on the decisions reported in Azadi Bachao Andolan vs UOI (2003) 263 ITR 706 (SC), and CIT versus Ely Lily and company (2009) 312 ITR 225 (SC). Ld. DR placed reliance on the orders of the authorities below. 5. We have gone through the record in the light of the submissions on either side. It is the argument of the Ld. AR that the issues that is substantially involved in these appeal are - whether Section 206AA of the Act…

Aditya Jyot Eye Hospital P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 6(1)-1, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby ordered to be partly allowed

ITA 5325/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R. C. Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.5325/Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Aditya Jyot Eye Hospital बिधम/ Ito 6(1)-1 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Pvt. Ltd. Vs. 153, Major Parameshwaran Mumbai-400020. Road Wadala (W) Mumbai-400031. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadca2900R (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Chaitanya Anjaria (Dr) Assessee By: Shri Anil Sathe (Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 04.09.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 24.10.2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 13.08.2015 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The Ay. 2010-11. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: - “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, Ld. Clt (Appeals) Erred In Confirming The Conclusion Of The Assessing Officer That The Flat Purchased For Providing

For Appellant: Shri Anil Sathe (AR)For Respondent: Shri Chaitanya Anjaria (DR)

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 2(22)(e)Section 40A(3)

…art of the assessee company but there is no violation of any provision of the Income Tax Act. The claim of the assessee is not liable to be declined. In this regard, we also find support of law settled in case titled as Union of India Vs. Azadi Bachao Andolan 263 ITR 706 (SC), Madras High Court in M.V. Vallipan Vs. CIT 170 ITR 238 & Bhoruka Engg. Ltd. Vs. DCIT 356 ITR 25. The assessee company neither transferred the funds outside the company nor to the director, therefore, the provision of Section 2(22)(e) of the Act is not applicable to the facts of the case. Accordingly, we set aside the finding of the CIT(A) i…

Viacom 18 Media P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 4(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 618/MUM/2017[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2018AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh() & Shri G Manjunatha ()

Section 195Section 248Section 9(1)(vi)Section 90(2)

…Treaty. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court, while answering the question in favour of the assessee has considered OECD Convention, Commentary thereon and the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of UOI & Another vs Azadi Bachao Andolan & Another (2003) 263 ITR 706 (SC). 9. In this view of the matter and considering the ratios of the case laws discussed above, we are of the considered view that the assessee is not liable to deduct / withhold tax u/s 195 in respect of payment made to M/s Intelsat Corporation, USA for rendering transponder services. Therefore, we set aside the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A…

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (4) vs. M/S Chamundi Winery and Distillery

ITA/172/2017HC Karnataka25 Sept 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 260

…urt dealt with Sl.No OTHER CASE LAWS Page No 11 Manglore Ganesh Beedi Works Vs. CIT 378 ITR 640 (SC) 64-70 12 D.S. Bist & Sons Vs. CIT 149 ITR 276 (Del) 71-74 37 PCIT Vs. IDMC Ltd. 393 ITR 441 (Guj) 227-233 47 UOI Vs.Azadi Bachao Andolan & Anr 263 ITR 706 (SC) 284-312 Date of Judgment 25-09-2018 I.T.A.No.155/2016 and connected matters The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors. Vs. M/s. Chamundi Winery and Distillery 100/137 a case of taxability of Lease Rentals recovered by the Assessee, where a portion of it was rec…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Chamundi Winery and Distillery

ITA/467/2015HC Karnataka25 Sept 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 260

…urt dealt with Sl.No OTHER CASE LAWS Page No 11 Manglore Ganesh Beedi Works Vs. CIT 378 ITR 640 (SC) 64-70 12 D.S. Bist & Sons Vs. CIT 149 ITR 276 (Del) 71-74 37 PCIT Vs. IDMC Ltd. 393 ITR 441 (Guj) 227-233 47 UOI Vs.Azadi Bachao Andolan & Anr 263 ITR 706 (SC) 284-312 Date of Judgment 25-09-2018 I.T.A.No.155/2016 and connected matters The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors. Vs. M/s. Chamundi Winery and Distillery 100/137 a case of taxability of Lease Rentals recovered by the Assessee, where a portion of it was rec…

Hsbc Bank (Mauritius) Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 2(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal stands allowed and the Revenue’s cross

ITA 1086/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm

For Respondent: Shri Samuel Darse

Section 207Section 209Section 23Section 234BSection 271

…hile upholding the assessment order, the CIT(A) erred on the following counts: • By not following the Circular No. 789 dated 13 April 2000 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, the decision of Supreme Court in case ofAzadi Bachao Andolan v. DCIT [2003] 263 ITR 706 (SC) and the jurisdictional Bombay High Court in the case of DIT v. Universal International Music B. V [2013] 31 taxman.com 223 (Bombay HC) and considering the Appellant as not the 'beneficial owner' of the interest income earned on foreign currency loans; • By ignoring the other details / information, which clearly prove that it is the 'benefici…

Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan

What is Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan authority for?

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Sunil Haripant Pophale, Nashik

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Smt. Sunita Ajay Ramnathkar, Mumbai

Sunil Haripant Pophale, Nashik vs. Joint Commissioner of Inocme-Tax

Smt. Sunita Ajay Ramnathkar, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax

M3M India Holdings, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 2, Faridabad

The Dy. DIT (Exemption), Circle-1, Ahmedabad vs. Friends of Wwb India, Ahmedabad

John Deere Eqipment P. Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Director of Income-Tax

John Deere Eqipment P. Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Director of Income-Tax

John Deere India Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Director of Income-Tax

John Deere India Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Director of Income-Tax

Uma Singal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Centrl Circle-3, New Delhi

Ritu Singal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 3, New Delhi

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Jaipur vs. M/S. Angel Infrastructure Private Limited, Jaipur

M/S Angel Infrastructure (P) Ltd., Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

M/S Kei Industries Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO (International Taxation), New Delhi

Aditya Jyot Eye Hospital P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 6(1)-1, Mumbai

Viacom 18 Media P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 4(3)(1), Mumbai

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (4) vs. M/S Chamundi Winery and Distillery

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Chamundi Winery and Distillery

Hsbc Bank (Mauritius) Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 2(2)(2), Mumbai