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 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 367,164 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 90 Section 234B Section 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 test section 2(ma)multilateral instrument section 286 azadi bachao andolan section 90(1)treaty benefits section 295 section 28(i)ppt

Judgments citing Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan

Ram Avadhanulu Jonnavithula, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(3)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1645/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Navneeth N. Kini, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 90

…icial to a taxpayer. Therefore, the provisions of DTAA override the provisions of the Act, to the extent they are beneficial to the assessee. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following cases and circulars: Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan [2003] 263 ITR 706 (SC) CIT v. Eli Lily & Co. (India) (P.) Ltd. [2009] 178 Taxman 505 (SC) GE India Technology Centre (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [2010] 193 Taxman 234 (SC) Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [2021] 125 taxmann.com 42 (SC) (Pgs. 106-109 of PB 2-Paras 25 & 26) CBDT Circular No. 333 dated 2/4/82 137 ITR (St.) It was submitted that when th…

Vamsi Krishna Ayyalasomayajula, Telangana vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(3)(4), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1469/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Smt. Vaidehi G., CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 6(1)Section 90(2)

…cial to a taxpayer. Therefore, the provisions of DTAA override the provisions of the Act, to the extent they are beneficial to the assessee. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following cases and circulars: Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan [2003] 263 ITR 706 (SC) CIT v. Eli Lily & Co. (India) (P.) Ltd. [2009] 178 Taxman 505 (SC) GE India Technology Centre (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [2010] 193 Taxman 234 (SC) Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [2021] 125 taxmann.com 42 (SC) (Pgs. 106-109 of PB 2-Paras 25 & 26) CBDT Circular No. 333 dated 2/4/82 137 ITR (St.) It was submitted that when th…

Saket Kanoi, Gurgaon vs. DCIT Intl. Taxation, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3243/DEL/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Oct 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Sunny Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)

…e ground that the assessee ‘is not paying taxes in UAE’. The Assessing Officer relied upon the decision of the AAR in the case of Abdul Razack Menon 276 ITR 306 which had considered the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Azadi Bachao Andolan 263 ITR 706 (sc) and held that the assessee has failed to discharge the onus on it to prove that it is liable to pay tax in UAE. According to the AO it is not sufficient for a person to claim the benefits of Article 13(3) to be just a “Resident of the other contracting State”, but he must also have paid tax on the income in respect of which the benefit of Ar…

Basavalinga Sadasivaiah Ajaikumar, Mysore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1470/BANG/2024[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore19 Sept 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan Kassessment Years : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Huilgol, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian S, JCIT (DR)

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)

…ayer. Therefore, the provisions of DTAA override the provisions . Page 7 of 9 of the Act, to the extent they are beneficial to the assessee. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following cases and circulars: Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan [2003] 263 ITR 706 (SC)CIT v. Eli Lily & Co (India) P. Ltd (2009) 178 Taxman 505 (SC)GE India Technology Centre P. Ltd v CIT (2010) 193 Taxman 234 (SC) Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence P. Ltd v CIT (2021) 125 taxmann.com 42 (SC) (Pg 106-109 of PB 2-Para 25 & 26) CBDT Circular No 333 dated 2/4/82 137 ITR (St.) It was submitted that when there is no conditio…

Neetu Agarwal, Kolkata vs. Income Tax Officer - Ward 7(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 67/KOL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Sept 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Puja Agarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Abhishek Kumar, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 234BSection 250Section 90

…the case of Mangalore Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner (1992 Supp (1) SCC 21), Sambhaji Vs. Gangabai (2008) 17 SCC 117 and a lot many decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court including the case in Union of India Vs. Azadi Bachao Andolan (2003) 263 ITR 706 (SC) etc. and reached a conclusion that since Rule 128(9) of the Rules does not provide for disallowance of FTC in the case of delay in filing Form 67 and such filing within the time allowed for filing the return of income under section 139(1) of the Act is only directory, since DTAA over rides the Act, and the Rules cannot be contrary to the Act…

M/S. Bajaj Auto Ltd., Mumbai vs. Addl. CIT. RG. - 3(1), Mumbai

ITA 1496/MUM/2007[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Sept 2024AY 2003-2004

Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 35DSection 40Section 80H

…not be conclusive of arrangement being sham or a device. As regards the observations of the-Hon'ble Supreme Court in McDowell [1985] 154 ITR 148, the matter has been explained in subsequent judgments including in Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan [2003] 263 ITR 706 (SC); AIR 2004 SC 107. Reiterating the view that the assessee was entitled to arrange his affairs to reduce his tax liability, without violating the law, it was observed in Azadi Bachao Andolan [2003] 263 ITR 706 (SQ; AIR 2004 SC 107 that the principle laid down in IRC v. Duke of Westminster [1936) AC 1 was still valid. 4. It was further observed…

General Motors Overses Disribution Coporation, Usa vs. ACIT Circle International Taxation 1(3)(1), New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2360/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2014-15 General Motors Company Usa, Vs Acit, Circle International 1209 Orange Street, Taxation 1(3)(1), Wilmington Delaware New Delhi – 110 002 United States, Zip Code - 19801 (Pan: Aaecg5571H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2015-16 General Motors Overseas Vs Acit, Circle International Distribution Corporation, Usa Taxation 1(3)(1), 2711, Centreville Roadnew Castle New Delhi – 110 002 County, Wilmington, Usa-19808 (Pan: Aaecg5571H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv., Shri Vishal Kalra, Adv., Shri Ss Tomar, Adv. & Shri Sumeet Hemkar, Ca Revenue By : Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 05.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 05.09.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv., Shri VishalFor Respondent: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR

Section 115ASection 148Section 234BSection 234c

…rticle 2 in a Contracting State and it is immaterial whether the person actually pays the tax or not.  Reliance in this regard, is placed on the Supreme Court ruling in case of UO and Anr vs. Azadi Bachao Andolan and Anr [20131 4 ITA Nos.2359-2360/Del/2022 263 ITR 706 (SC) wherein it was observed that liability to taxation is a legal situation: payment of tax is a fiscal fact. The Court had noted that for the purpose of application of Article 4 of a tax treaty, what is relevant is the legal situation, namely liability to taxation, and not the fiscal fact of actual payment of tax. The relevant extracts of the r…

General Motors Company, Usa vs. ACIT Circlr International Taxation 1(3)(1), New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2359/DEL/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv., Shri VishalFor Respondent: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR

Section 115ASection 148Section 234BSection 234c

Tyco Electronics Singapore Pte Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Circle- Int. Tax. 3(1)(1), Delhi

The appeal is allowed

ITA 1760/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2017-18 Tyco Electronics Singapore Vs Dcit, Pte Limited, Circle Intl. Taxation Te Park-22B, Doddenakundi 3(1)(1), 2Nd Phase Industrial Area, Delhi. Whitefield Road, Bengaluru – 560 048, Karnataka. Pan: Aadct9910C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate & Ms Somya Jain, Ca Revenue By : Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, It-Dr & Shri Anshul, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 05.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 05.09.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: This Appeal Is Preferred By The Assessee Against The Final Assessment Order Dated 23.06.2022 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred As ‘The Act’), By Assessing Officer, Circle Int. Taxation 3(1)(1), Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao).

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, IT-DR &

Section 143(3)

…ot discharged the onus cast upon him and is claiming the benefit just on the basis of the documents referred above. He has further relied upon the CBDT circular no. 789 of 13.04.2000 and Apex Court order in the case of Union of India v/s Azadi Bachao Andolan (263 ITR 706). The claim of the assessee that TRC is the final authority for determining the allowability of benefits under the DTAA is not correct. Apex Court in the case of Vodafone International Holding v/s Union of India ([2012] 17 taxmann.com 202 (SC) has considered this aspect along with CBDT circular no. 789 of 13.04.2000 and Apex Court order in the ca…

Balram Chainrai, Mumbai vs. Int Tax, Ward 2(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 2267/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ravikant Pathak, ARFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sant, Addl. CIT-DR

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 153Section 271(1)(c)

…nothing to impeach the genuineness of the transaction. With regard to the ruling in McDowell & Co. Ltd. vs. CTO (1985) 47 CTR ISC) 126 (1985) 154 ITR 148 (SC), it may be stated that in the later decision of this Court in Union of India vs Azadi Bachao Andolan 263 ITR 706(SC) it has been held that a citizen is free to carry on ita business within the four comers 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 & Co. Ltd. case (supral. Hence. in the cases arising before 1st April, 2002, losses pertaini…

Andrew Jerome Joseph, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer-Ward 5(3)(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 664/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Sri Abdul Kadir Jawadwala, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel for department

Section 143(1)Section 90

…icial to a taxpayer. Therefore, the provisions of DTAA override the provisions of the Act, to the extent they are beneficial to the assessee. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following cases and circulars: Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan [2003] 263 ITR 706 (SC) CIT v Eli Lily & Co (India) P Ltd (2009) 178 Taxman 505 (SC) GE India Technology Centre P Ltd v CIT (2010) 193 Taxman 234 (SC) Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence P Ltd v CIT (2021) 125 taxmann.com 42 (SC) (Pg 106-109 of PB 2-Para 25 & 26) CBDT Circular No 333 dated 2/4/82 137 ITR (St.) It was submitted that when there is no condition…

Krishnakumar Balasankara Subramanian, Bangalore vs. DCIT Circle 3(3)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 247/BANG/2024[ 2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2024

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Smt. Preeti Goel, A.RFor Respondent: Sri V. Parithivel, D.R

Section 143(1)Section 220(2)Section 234BSection 245Section 90

…icial to a taxpayer. Therefore, the provisions of DTAA override the provisions of the Act, to the extent they are beneficial to the assessee. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following cases and circulars: Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan [2003] 263 ITR 706 (SC) CIT v Eli Lily & Co (India) P Ltd (2009) 178 Taxman 505 (SC) GE India Technology Centre P Ltd v CIT (2010) 193 Taxman 234 (SC) Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence P Ltd v CIT (2021) 125 taxmann.com 42 (SC) (Pg 106-109 of PB 2-Para 25 & 26) CBDT Circular No 333 dated 2/4/82 137 ITR (St.) Krishnakumar Balasankara Subramanian, Bangalore P…

Wild West Domains, Llc, Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle-3(1)(1), Int. Tax., New Delhi

ITA 1774/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.1774/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 बनाम Wild West Domains, Llc Acit, Go Daddy India Domains & Hosting Vs. Circle-3(1)(1), Int. Services Private Limited, First Floor, Taxation, 01A167, Wework Bristol Chowk, Civic Centre, Platina Tower, Mg Road, Sector-28, Minto Road, Gurgaon, Haryana. Newdelhi. Pan No.Aabcw2372H अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 115ASection 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 234ASection 234DSection 244ASection 274Section 9

…sufficient evidence for tax residency and beneficial ownership of an income and is eligible to avail the benefit of the DTAA. In this regard, reference may be drawn from the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of UOI vs. Azadi Bachao Andolan [2003] 263 ITR 706 (refer Page 61 to 96 of the case law paper book) wherein the Court upheld that validity of Circular 789 dated April 13, 2000, issued by Central Board of Direct Taxes (“CBDT”), thereby ensuring the applicability of India-Mauritius tax treaties having a valid TRC issued in Mauritius. 12. Furthermore, it is respectfully submitted that the Government…

Anindya Sarkar, Kolkata vs. A.D.I.T., CPC, Bengaluru, Bengalru

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1345/KOL/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Jul 2024AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri C.M. Roy, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Subhro Das, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 90

…n the case of Mangalore Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner (1992 Supp (1) SCC 21), Sambhaji Vs. Gangabai (2008) 17 SCC 117 and a lot many decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court including the case m Union of India Vs. Azadi Bachao Andolan (2003) 263 ITR 706 (SC) etc. and reached a conclusion that since Rule 128(9) of the Rules does not provide for disallowance of FTC in the case of delay in filing Form 67 and such filing within the time allowed for filing the return of income under section 139(1) of the Act is only directory, since DTAA over rides the Act, and the Rules cannot be contrary to the Act…

Tiger Global Eight Holdings, Mauritius vs. DCIT Intl. Taxation Circle 3(1)(1), New Delhi

ITA 2345/DEL/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2020-21 Tiger Global Eight Holdings, Vs Dcit, C/O 202 Rajnigandha International Taxation, Apartment, Circle 3(1)(1), Prof. V.S. Agashe Path, New Delhi. Dadar (West), Mumbai 400 028, Maharashtra. Pan: Aafct0276M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Porus Kaka, Sr. Advocate; Shri Manish Kant, Advocate; & Ms Amrita Shenoy & Hetal Jakharia, Cas Revenue By : Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 25.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR

Section 144C(13)

…year under consideration and the tax treaty continues to be as is for investment made by an assessee prior to 1 April 2017. 6.1 Ld. Sr. Counsel has further relied the Hon’ble Supreme Court judgement in the case of Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan [2003] 263 ITR 706 (SC), to submit that said judgment has upheld the applicability of aforesaid circular No. 789 dated 13 April 2000, issued by CBDT, thereby confirming that a Certificate of Residence issued by the Mauritias, is sufficient evidence of residency. He then has relied judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Vodafone International Holdings B.V.…

ACIT, Circle-2(2)(1), Int. Taxation, New Delhi vs. Maven India Fund, Mauritius

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1766/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2018-19

Section 10(34)Section 10(38)Section 13(4)Section 133(6)

…ard of Direct Taxes, stating that a valid TRC issued by Mauritius Authorities is adequate evidence of residency as well as beneficial ownership. In support of his contention, learned counsel relied upon the following decisions: - UOI v. Azadi Bachao Andolan 263 ITR 706 (SC); - Bid Services Division (Mauritius) Ltd. v. Authority for Advance Ruling, W.P. No. 713 of 2021, judgment dated 08.03.2023 (Bombay High Court); - Superb Mind Holding Ltd. v. ACIT, ITA no. 1568/Del/2022, dated 05.03.2024 (Trib.) - Norwest Venture Partners X –Mauritius v. DCIT – ITA no. 2311/Del/2023 decision dated 19.03.2024; - Leapfrog Finan…

India Property (Mauritius) Company II, Mauritius vs. ACIT, Circle Int. Taxation 2(1)(1), New Delhi

ITA 1020/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharma

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 234ASection 90(2)

…ve control and management of the assessee company therefore rests outside of Mauritius. The assessee has argued that it holds a valid IRC and further, as per Circular No.789 dated 13 April 2000, Supreme Court in the case of UOI v. Azadi Bachao Andolan (2003) 263 ITR 706 and various other judicial precedents which have held that Tax Treaty benefits should be granted on the basis of tax: residency certificate ("IRC") issued by Mauritius Revenue Authorities. However, subsequent Judicial Precedents and decisions have held that TRC is not conclusive in deciding tax residency and granting of benefit under DTAA. In the…

Dayal Agro Products Ltd, Akola vs. JCIT, Akola Range, Akola

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 201/NAG/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur16 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri K.P.Dewani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Benjwal, CIT DR

Section 250

…ision in the case of McDowell (cited supra). In the case of DCIT vs. Kashyap Sweetners (P) Ltd. (cited supra), wherein the Tribunal, Indore Bench, while relying upon the observation of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Azadi Bachao Andolan, reported in 263 ITR 706 (SC) observed as under:- "The court finds that notwithstanding a series of legal steps taken by an assessee, the intended legal result has not been achieved, the court might be justified in overlooking the intermediate steps, but it is not permissible Dayal Agro Products Ltd vs. JCIT, Akola ITA no.201/Nag./2017 for the court to treat the interve…

Asha Rani Pandya, Indore vs. CPC Bangalore, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 176/IND/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Jun 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniasha Rani Pandya Dcit/Acit-1(1) 389 1Ad- Scheme No.74C Indore Vijay Nagar, Vs. Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aqqpp7081A Assessee By Ms. Shreya Jain & Shri Prakash Jain, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 27.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 28 .06.2024

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 90Section 91

…icial to a taxpayer. Therefore, the provisions of DTAA override the provisions of the Act, to the extent they are beneficial to the assessee. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following cases and circulars: Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan [2003] 263 ITR 706 (SC) CIT v Eli Lily & Co (India) P Ltd (2009) 178 Taxman 505 (SC) GE India Technology Centre P Ltd v CIT (2010) 193 Taxman 234 (SC) Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence P Ltd v CIT (2021) 125 taxmann.com 42 (SC) (Pg 106-109 of PB 2- Para 25 & 26) CBDT Circular No 333 dated 2/4/82 137 ITR (St.) It was submitted that when there is no condition…

Manav Malik, Noida vs. ACIT Circle 5(2)(2), Gautam Budh Nagar

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 2293/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2019-20 Manav Malik, Vs Acit, B-146, Sector-19, Circle 5(2)(2), Noida, Gautam Budh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh – 201 301. Uttar Pradesh. Pan: Apzpm1646L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms Kirti Bindal, Ca Revenue By : Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.06.2024

For Appellant: Ms Kirti Bindal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, CIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154

…icial to a taxpayer. Therefore, the provisions of DTAA override the provisions of the Act, to the extent they are beneficial to the assessee. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following cases and circulars: Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan [2003] 263 ITR 706 (SC) CIT v Eli Lily & Co (India) P Ltd (2009) 178 Taxman 505 9 (SC) GE India Technology Centre P Ltd v CIT (2010) 193 Taxman 234 (SC) Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence P Ltd v CIT (2021) 125 taxmann.com 42 (SC) (Pg 106-109 of PB 2- Para 25 & 26) CBDT Circular No 333 dated 2/4/82 137 ITR (St.) It was submitted that when there is no condit…