Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan

263 ITR 706Supreme Court of India2003#79 most cited

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.

691

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan · section 90 · treaty benefits · tax planning · colourable devices · liability to taxation · payment of tax · Article 4 · tax treaty

Also reported as

132 Taxmann.com 373

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 139(1)Section 90Section 234BSection 143(2)Section 143(1)Section 142(1)Section 148
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 286(9)section 90(1)(b)principal purpose testsection 2(ma)multilateral instrumentsection 286azadi bachao andolansection 90(1)treaty benefitssection 295section 28(i)ppt

Judgments citing Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan

Accordis Beheer B.V. ( As Successor to M.S, Accordis Overseas Investement B.V), Mumbai vs. DDIT (It) 1(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee and the appeal of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 4688/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am & Pawan Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.4688/Mum/2010 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year:2006-07) M/S Accordis Beheer B V बनाम/ Director Of Income Tax Officer (As Successors To M/S Accordis (International Taxation)-1(1), Vs. Overseas Investment B V), Scindia House, C/O Bansi S Mehta & Co., Ballard Pier, 11/13, Bootawala Building, Mumbai-400038 2Nd Floor, Hornimum Circle, Mumbai-400001 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

Section 112Section 391

…t rendered in the case of McDowell & Co. (1985)(154 ITR 148). The assessee takes objection to this observation of the Ld CIT(A) by placing reliance on the decision of Hon‟ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of Union of India Vs. Azadi Bachao Andolan (2003)(263 ITR 706). We notice that the assessee, in the instant case, is pleading for relief on the basis of its own interpretation of Article 13(5) of the DTAA. The fact that it has tendered the shares to the M/s Century Enka Ltd under a scheme of arrangement approved by Hon‟ble Calcutta High Court is not disputed. Hence we do not see any colourable device in the…

Flextronics Software Systems Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 5550/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S.V.Mehrotra & Shri A.T. Varkey

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: O R D E R
Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 144CSection 234BSection 234CSection 263Section 92C

…he following judgments: - J K Woolen Manufacturers vs. CIT 72 ITR 612 (SC) - CIT vs. Dalmia Cement (P) Ltd. 254 ITR 377 (Del) - CIT vs. Padmani Packaging (P) ltd. 155 Taxmann 268 (Del) - S.A. Builders Ltd. vs. CIT 288 ITR 1 (SC) - UOI vs. Azadi Bachao Andolan 263 ITR 706 (SC) iv) No application of transfer pricing method by the TPO “It is submitted that the expenditure on payment of administrative/ corporate fee of Rs. 89,640,636 were incurred by the assessee, in the course of its business of provision of software development. In consideration of the administrative and marketing services rendered to the assessee…

M/S. Icici Bank Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT RG. - 3 (1), Mumbai

ITA 4903/MUM/2005[1993-1994]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jan 2016AY 1993-1994
For Appellant: Ms. Aarti Vissanji (AR)For Respondent: Shri Manjunatha R. Swamy (CIT-DR)
Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 32

…of income, that the Tribunal had delivered a favourable decision for AY 1995-96(115ITD25), that Special Bench had relied upon the case of McDowell, that the law laid down by McDowell was no longer a good law after the decision of Azadi Bachao Andolan and Anr.(263 ITR 706).She referred to the case of IndusInd Bank Ltd. (ITA No.2839/ Mum/2008), IndusInd Bank Ltd. (55 Taxmann 408), Development Credit Bank (ITA 5490/Mum/2010); HDFC Ltd. (ITA No.4886/87 of 2010); Nayan Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd. (231Taxmann 665); Roopam Mercantile Ltd. (91 ITD 237); Advaita Estate Development Pvt. Ltd.(147 ITD 693);Schrader Dun…

ADIT (It) 1(1), Mumbai vs. Aon Global Insurance Service Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 5186/MUM/2009[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sanjay Garg, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita Nos.5184 To 5186/Mum/2009 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2006-2007 To 2008-09) Adit (International Taxation)- Vs. M/S Aon Global 1(1), Mumbai Insurance Service Limited, 302, Dalamal House, Jamnalal Bajaj Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 स्थममी रेखम सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaeca 1565 H (अऩीरमथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. यमजस्र् की ओर से /Revenue By : Ms. Vandana Sagar यनधमवरयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Porus Kaka सुनर्मई की तमयीख / Date Of Hearing : 30/10/2015 घोषणम की तमयीख/Date Of Pronouncement 30/11/2015 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Cit(A), Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2006-07 To 2008-09, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.201(1)/201(1A) Of The I.T.Act. 2. Common Grounds Have Been Taken In All The Three Assessment Years Under Consideration, Therefore All The Three Appeals Were Heard Together & Now Disposed Off By This Order For Convenience & Brevity. Grounds Taken For The Assessment Year 2006-07 Are As Under :- “1 . On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Holding That The Non-Resident Insurers From The Non Treaty Countries Have No Business Connection In 2

For Appellant: Shri Porus KakaFor Respondent: Ms. Vandana Sagar
Section 133ASection 192Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)

…ontended that there is no dispute about the judgement that obligation to deduct tax arises only when the remittance is a sum chargeable under the Act. The word used is CHARGEABLE, not charged. It has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Azaadi Bachao Andolan 263 ITR 706, “In our view the contention of the assessee proceeds on the fallacious premise that the liability to taxation is same as payment of tax. Liability to taxation is a legal situation, payment of tax is a fiscal fact.” 8 ITA Nos.5184-8186/09 9. As per ld. CIT DR, as long as the remittance is chargeable, whether or not actually charged, obligation t…

ADIT (It) 1(1), Mumbai vs. Aon Global Insurance Service Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 5185/MUM/2009[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sanjay Garg, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita Nos.5184 To 5186/Mum/2009 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2006-2007 To 2008-09) Adit (International Taxation)- Vs. M/S Aon Global 1(1), Mumbai Insurance Service Limited, 302, Dalamal House, Jamnalal Bajaj Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 स्थममी रेखम सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaeca 1565 H (अऩीरमथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. यमजस्र् की ओर से /Revenue By : Ms. Vandana Sagar यनधमवरयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Porus Kaka सुनर्मई की तमयीख / Date Of Hearing : 30/10/2015 घोषणम की तमयीख/Date Of Pronouncement 30/11/2015 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Cit(A), Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2006-07 To 2008-09, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.201(1)/201(1A) Of The I.T.Act. 2. Common Grounds Have Been Taken In All The Three Assessment Years Under Consideration, Therefore All The Three Appeals Were Heard Together & Now Disposed Off By This Order For Convenience & Brevity. Grounds Taken For The Assessment Year 2006-07 Are As Under :- “1 . On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Holding That The Non-Resident Insurers From The Non Treaty Countries Have No Business Connection In 2

For Appellant: Shri Porus KakaFor Respondent: Ms. Vandana Sagar
Section 133ASection 192Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)

…ontended that there is no dispute about the judgement that obligation to deduct tax arises only when the remittance is a sum chargeable under the Act. The word used is CHARGEABLE, not charged. It has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Azaadi Bachao Andolan 263 ITR 706, “In our view the contention of the assessee proceeds on the fallacious premise that the liability to taxation is same as payment of tax. Liability to taxation is a legal situation, payment of tax is a fiscal fact.” 8 ITA Nos.5184-8186/09 9. As per ld. CIT DR, as long as the remittance is chargeable, whether or not actually charged, obligation t…

ITO 19(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Khalil M Bharwani, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 223/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Nov 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 223/Mum/2011 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2006-07) Income Tax Officer-19(3)(2) Room No. 306, 3Rd Floor अपीलाथ"/Appellant Piramal Chambes, Parel Lalbaug, Mumbai 400012 बनाम/ Vs. Ms. Khalil M. Bharwani ""यथ"/Respondent Flat No. 9, Noor-E-Rehmat 59-B.J. Road, Bandra (W) Mumbai 400050 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan - Ajjpb7570L अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By: Shri Satya Pal Kumar ""यथ" क" ओर से/ Respondent By: Shri B.V. Jhaveri सुनवाई क" तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 04.11.2015 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 27.11.2015 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shailendra Kumar Yadav, Jm This Appeal Has Been Filed By Revenue Against The Order Of Cit(A) On Following Grounds: -

For Appellant: Shri Satya Pal KumarFor Respondent: Shri B.V. Jhaveri
Section 68

…pendence and is now striving towards building a welfare society and could not just simply rely on age-old observation in the cases decided in England. 5) The AO also argued that the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Azadi Bachao Andolan reported in 263 ITR 706 doe not prevail upon his own judgment in Mcdowell. The AO also relied on the Mumbai ITAT decision in the case o Housing Development and Finance Corp. Ltd given in (ITA No.2913/MUM/1995 dt.12.09.2005 wherein the Mumbai (ITAT has held that the findings of Mcdowell's case is still applicable and has to be respected. The AO has also further relied up…

Commr.of Income Tax Delhi I vs. M/S Abhinandan Invest.Ltd

ITA/130/2001HC Delhi19 Nov 2015

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

For Appellant: Mr. Rohit Madan, Senior Standing counsel withFor Respondent: Mr. Ajay Vohra, Senior Advocate with Ms
Section 260A

…a and Anr.: (2012) 341 ITR 1 (SC), the Supreme Court held that the opinion of Justice Chinnappa Reddy must be read in conjunction with the observation of Justice Ranganath Misra (i.e. the majority opinion). In Union of India v Azadi Bachao Andolan: (2003) 263 ITR 706 (SC), the Supreme Court held that the above view of Justice Chinnappa Reddy was a far cry from the majority opinion and further concluded that the decision in Mcdowell (supra) cannot be read as laying down that every attempt at tax planning was illegitimate and must be ignored. 40. The Supreme Court in Azadi Bachao Andolan (supra) approve…

Goldie Prem Ahuja, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 29, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 4545/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Nov 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble S/Shri Saktijit Dey (Jm) & Ashwani Taneja (Am)

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153A

…iminating documents were required. All other arguments were rejected by the Ld. CIT(A), and dismissed the contentions by applying the ratio of the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cae of McDowell (154 ITR 148(SC) and Azadi Bachao Andolan (263 ITR 706 (SC). It was held that once there was surrender by the builder and the bound to be in cash, and therefore rightly added by the AO. 10. Being aggrieved by the decision of ld. CIT(A), the assessee has contested the order of ld. CIT(A) before us. 11. It is noted by us, as brought to our notice by the ld. Counsel, that in the immediately preceding…

Manish C Jogani HUF, Mumbai vs. ITO 16(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7344/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Nov 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 7344/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Manish C. Jogani, Huf Ito-16(2)(2), बनाम/ C/21, Shree Ganeshprasad Chs Ltd., Mumbai Vs. Sleater Road, Grant Road, Mumbai-400 007 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aafhm 8076 B (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 7345/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) बनाम/ Sandeep C. Jogani (Huf) Ito-16(2)(2), Mumbai-400 007 Mumbai Vs. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aalhs 2461 Q (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 7346/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) बनाम/ Girish C. Jogani (Huf) Ito-16(2)(2), Mumbai-400 007 Mumbai Vs. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aadhg 0062 M (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 7347/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) बनाम/ Champaklal D. Jogani (Huf) Ito-16(2)(2), Mumbai-400 007 Mumbai Vs. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaahj 8938 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : (A.Y. 2008-09) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Jayesh Dadia ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Smt. Bharati Singh सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 02.11.2015 Date Of Hearing : 16.11.2015 Date Of Order आदेश / O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, A. M.: This Is A Set Of Four Appeals By Different Assessees, Agitating The Dismissal Of Their Appeals Contesting Their Respective Assessments U/S. 143(3) R/W S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ Hereinafter) Dated 07.2.2014 For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2008-09 By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Vide His Separate Orders Of Even Date (20.10.2014). The Issue/S Arising Being Common, The Appeals Were Posted For Hearing & Were Accordingly, Heard Together.

For Appellant: Shri Jayesh DadiaFor Respondent: Smt. Bharati Singh
Section 143(3)

…td. vs. ARI Ltd. [1986] 157 ITR 77 (SC) CIT v. Akshay Textile Trading & Agencies (P.) Ltd. [2008] 304 ITR 401 (confirming that there was no departure from the principles/ratio of the decision in McDowell & Co. Ltd.(supra) in UOI v. Azadi Bachao Andolan [2003] 263 ITR 706 (SC)) Twinstar Holdings Ltd.v. Dy. CIT [2003] 260 ITR 6 (Bom) (A.Y. 2008-09) It needs to be appreciated that though the Revenue has sought to impugn the transaction/s as bogus/not genuine, the issue is qua the applicability of section 68, whereby the statute itself casts a burden of proof on the assessee to satisfactorily explain the nature and s…

Four Dimensions Securities (I) Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 4(1), Mumbai

Appeals are disposed off in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 1011/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2005-06 M/S Four Dimensions Addl. Commissioner Of Securities (India) Ltd. Income Tax, Range-4(1), बनाम/ 29, Bank Street, 1St Floor, 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Fort, Mumbai Mumbai-400020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aaacf1734F Assessment Year: 2005-06 Addl. Commissioner Of M/S Four Dimensions Income Tax, Range-4(1), Securities (India) Ltd. बनाम/ 6Th Floor,Aayakar Bhavan, 29, Bank Street, 1St Floor, Vs. Mumbai-400020 Fort, Mumbai (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No.Aaacf1734F Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/S Four Dimensions Addl. Commissioner Of Securities (India) Ltd. Income Tax, Range-4(1), बनाम/ 29, Bank Street, 1St Floor, 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Fort, Mumbai Mumbai-400020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aaacf1734F

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 94(7)

…ies India Pvt. Ltd. ITA No.322 & 790/Mum/2009 & Ors cases iii. McDowell and Co. Ltd. v. CTO [1985] 154 ITR 148 (SC) (para 20) iv. Rajasthan State Warehousing Corporation v. CIT [2000] 242 ITR 450 (SC) (para 13) v. Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan [2003] 263 ITR 706 (SC) (para 20) If this issue is analyzed with the provision contained in the Income Tax Act itself, section 294 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by providing that “if on the first day of April in any assessment year, provision has not yet been made by the Central Act for the charging the income tax, for that assessment year, this Act shall neverthele…

DCIT -4(1), Mumbai vs. Four Dimension Securities (I) Ltd, Mumbai

Appeals are disposed off in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 790/MUM/2009[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2015AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2005-06 M/S Four Dimensions Addl. Commissioner Of Securities (India) Ltd. Income Tax, Range-4(1), बनाम/ 29, Bank Street, 1St Floor, 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Fort, Mumbai Mumbai-400020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aaacf1734F Assessment Year: 2005-06 Addl. Commissioner Of M/S Four Dimensions Income Tax, Range-4(1), Securities (India) Ltd. बनाम/ 6Th Floor,Aayakar Bhavan, 29, Bank Street, 1St Floor, Vs. Mumbai-400020 Fort, Mumbai (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No.Aaacf1734F Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/S Four Dimensions Addl. Commissioner Of Securities (India) Ltd. Income Tax, Range-4(1), बनाम/ 29, Bank Street, 1St Floor, 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Fort, Mumbai Mumbai-400020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aaacf1734F

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 94(7)

…ies India Pvt. Ltd. ITA No.322 & 790/Mum/2009 & Ors cases iii. McDowell and Co. Ltd. v. CTO [1985] 154 ITR 148 (SC) (para 20) iv. Rajasthan State Warehousing Corporation v. CIT [2000] 242 ITR 450 (SC) (para 13) v. Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan [2003] 263 ITR 706 (SC) (para 20) If this issue is analyzed with the provision contained in the Income Tax Act itself, section 294 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by providing that “if on the first day of April in any assessment year, provision has not yet been made by the Central Act for the charging the income tax, for that assessment year, this Act shall neverthele…

Four Dimensions Securities (India) Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 4(1), Mumbai

Appeals are disposed off in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 322/MUM/2009[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2015AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2005-06 M/S Four Dimensions Addl. Commissioner Of Securities (India) Ltd. Income Tax, Range-4(1), बनाम/ 29, Bank Street, 1St Floor, 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Fort, Mumbai Mumbai-400020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aaacf1734F Assessment Year: 2005-06 Addl. Commissioner Of M/S Four Dimensions Income Tax, Range-4(1), Securities (India) Ltd. बनाम/ 6Th Floor,Aayakar Bhavan, 29, Bank Street, 1St Floor, Vs. Mumbai-400020 Fort, Mumbai (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No.Aaacf1734F Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/S Four Dimensions Addl. Commissioner Of Securities (India) Ltd. Income Tax, Range-4(1), बनाम/ 29, Bank Street, 1St Floor, 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Fort, Mumbai Mumbai-400020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aaacf1734F

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 94(7)

…ies India Pvt. Ltd. ITA No.322 & 790/Mum/2009 & Ors cases iii. McDowell and Co. Ltd. v. CTO [1985] 154 ITR 148 (SC) (para 20) iv. Rajasthan State Warehousing Corporation v. CIT [2000] 242 ITR 450 (SC) (para 13) v. Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan [2003] 263 ITR 706 (SC) (para 20) If this issue is analyzed with the provision contained in the Income Tax Act itself, section 294 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by providing that “if on the first day of April in any assessment year, provision has not yet been made by the Central Act for the charging the income tax, for that assessment year, this Act shall neverthele…

Dy DIT vs. M/S Infosys Bpo Ltd

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue and the cross

ITA 1143/BANG/2013[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jun 2015AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Jason P Boaz

For Respondent: Dr. P.K.Srihari, Addl.CIT
Section 115ASection 200A(1)Section 200A(1)(b)Section 206ASection 246A

…ountry, whichever is more beneficial to the assessee, having regard to the provisions of section 90(2) of the Act. In this context, the CIT(A) has correctly observed that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Azadi Bachao Andolan and Others vs. UOI, (2003) 263 ITR 706 (SC) has upheld the proposition that the provisions made in the DTAAs will prevail over the general provisions contained in the Act to the extent they are beneficial to the assessee. In this context, it would be worthwhile to observe that the DTAAs entered into between India and the other relevant countries in the present context provide for scop…

M/S Sterling Developers Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. JCIT, Bangalore

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed, whereas the appeal of Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1417/BANG/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jun 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri. N. V. Vasudevan

For Appellant: Shri. V. Srinivasan, CAFor Respondent: Dr. P. K. Srihari, Addl. CIT
Section 14ASection 5Section 57Section 70Section 80I

…s. The income therefrom had to be classified under the head ‘income from other sources’ since it was in the nature of interest. Reliance was placed by Ld. AR on the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan [(2003) 263 ITR 706]. 21. Per contra, Ld. DR submitted that interest rate on debentures had come down from 10% to 1% and assessee was not able to show why its associate concern SUDPL reduced the interest rate by 9%. As per the Ld. DR, this was ITA.1417/Bang/2012 & ITA.168/Bang/2013 Page - 18 nothing but a colourable device for claiming the loss on account of int…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Wipro Ltd

The appeals stand disposed of, accordingly

ITA/211/2009HC Karnataka25 Mar 2015

Bench: N.KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

Section 260

…. - 49 - 36. The Apex Court had an occasion to go into the validity of the agreements entered into under these provisions and their enforceability in the case of UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER VS. AZADI BACHAO ANDOLAN AND ANOTHER reported in 263 ITR 706. Dealing with the purpose of provisions for avoidance of double taxation, the Supreme Court at page 721 held as under :- “Every country seeks to tax the income generated within its territory on the basis of one or more connecting factors such as location of the source, residence of the taxable entity, maintenance of a permanent establishm…

M/S Wipro Limited vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

The appeals stand disposed of, accordingly

ITA/881/2008HC Karnataka25 Mar 2015

Bench: N.KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

Section 260

…. - 49 - 36. The Apex Court had an occasion to go into the validity of the agreements entered into under these provisions and their enforceability in the case of UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER VS. AZADI BACHAO ANDOLAN AND ANOTHER reported in 263 ITR 706. Dealing with the purpose of provisions for avoidance of double taxation, the Supreme Court at page 721 held as under :- “Every country seeks to tax the income generated within its territory on the basis of one or more connecting factors such as location of the source, residence of the taxable entity, maintenance of a permanent establishm…

Director of Income Tax vs. Infrasoft Ltd

ITA/1034/2009HC Delhi22 Nov 2013
Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 4Section 9(1)(vi)

…made by the counsel, we on 03.07.2013 held that Explanation 4 to Section 9(1)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 need not be examined and applied. Reference was also made to the judgment of the Supreme Court in UNION OF INDIA VS. AZADI BACHAO ANDOLAN (2003) 263 ITR 706. In view of what 2013:DHC:6018 ======================================================================= ITA 1034/2009 Page 3 of 174 transpired on 03.07.2013, with respect to the examination and applicability of Section 4 to Section 9(1)(vi), the second issue framed on 20.10.2009, does n…

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

ITTA/473/2012HC Telangana09 Jul 2013

M/S Mysore Polymers & Rubber Products Ltd vs. The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes

In the result, writ appeal No

STRP/112/2008HC Karnataka17 Jun 2013

Bench: D.V.SHYLENDRA KUMAR,B.S.INDRAKALA

Section 23(1)Section 24(1)Section 4Section 6

…BIHAR AND OTHERS [(2004) 137 STC 389] at para 19 to 22. Learned Counsel has submitted that judgment of the Supreme Court on interpretation of double taxation avoidance agreement in the case of UNION OF INDIA –VS- AZADI BACHAO ANDOLAN reported in (2003) 263 ITR 706 at page 741 also supports the case of the 33 respondent/assessee and are squarely applicable to the present situation is his submission. He alternatively submitted that without prejudice to the contentions urged on the question of liability under Section 6-B of the Act; that in view of the exemption under the proviso 10 to Sect…

Director of Income Tax

ITA/486/2011HC Delhi04 Jan 2012
Section 115ASection 143(3)Section 260ASection 44DSection 9(1)(vii)

…ITA Nos. 486/2011, 491/2011 & 492/2011 Page 1 of 26 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + INCOME TAX APPEAL NOS. 486/2011, 491/2011 & 492/2011 Reserved on : 21st October, 2011. % Date of Decision : 4th January, 2012. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX .... Appellant Through Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Advocate. VERSUS RIO TINTO TECHNICAL SERVICES …..Respondent Through Mr. Salil Kapoor, Mr. Ankit Gupta,…