(v). Wockhardt Ltd. v. ACIT

10 Taxmann.com 208Reported decision2011#5637 most cited

What is (v). Wockhardt Ltd. v. ACIT authority for?

Services rendered by employees of a non-resident company, which involve sharing management experiences and business strategies, are not considered technical services for the purpose of taxation as Fees for Technical Services (FTS).

20

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2022.

Also referred to as

Wockhardt Ltd. v. ACIT · Fees for Technical Services · FTS · non-resident · technical services · management experience · business strategy · Article 13 · India-U.K tax treaty · section 9(1)(vii)

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing (v). Wockhardt Ltd. v. ACIT

Renaissance Services Bv, Mumbai vs. DDIT (It) 2(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 7159/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jun 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Renaissance Services Bv The Deputy Director Of C/O Bmr & Associates Llp Income-Tax (International बिधम/ Bmr House, 36B Taxation)-2(1), 1St Floor 36B, Dr. R.K Shirodkar Marg, Room No. 120, Scindia Vs. Parel, Mumbai- 400 012 House, Ballard Estate Mumbai- 400 038 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aaecr4995E (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

For Appellant: S/shri Paras S. Savla and PratikFor Respondent: Shri M.V. Rajguru, Sr.D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(3)Section 234BSection 250

…P a g e | 1 ITA No. 7159/Mum/2012 A.Y 2009-10 Renaissance Services BV Vs. The DDIT (I.T.) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “L” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S.PANNU, AM AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM Renaissance Services BV The Deputy Director of C/o BMR & Associates LLP Income-Tax (International बिधम/ BMR House, 36B Taxation)-2(1), 1st Floor 36B, Dr. R.K Shirodkar Marg, Room No. 120, Scindia Vs. Parel, Mumbai- 400 012 House, Ballard Estate Mumbai- 400 038 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ PAN No. AAECR4995E (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant by : S/shri Paras S. Savla and Pratik…

Raytheon Ebasco Overseas Ltd, Bangalore vs. DDIT (It) 2(1), Mumbai

ITA 8567/MUM/2010[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Mar 2016AY 1998-99

Bench: S/Sh. Rajendra & Ram Lal Negiआयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं/.Ita No.8567/Mum/2010,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Assessment Year-1998-99 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Raytheon Ebasco Overseas Ltd. Dy.Cit-11 C/O, Pricewaterhouse Coopers Circle-2(1) Private Ltd., 6The Floor, Tower “D”, Vs. Mumbai. The Millenia, 1&2 Murphy Road, Ulsoor, Bangalore 560 008 Pan No.Aafcr 0222 H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) िनधा"रती िनधा"रती ओर ओर सेसेसेसे/Assessee By : S/Shri Kanchan Kaushal, Dhanesh Bafna िनधा"रती िनधा"रती ओर ओर राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Jasbir Chauhan सुनवाई सुनवाई क" क" तारीख तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 03.02.2016 सुनवाई सुनवाई क" क" तारीख तारीख घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 11.03.2016 आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश 1961 1961 254 254 आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act)

For Appellant: S/Shri Kanchan Kaushal, Dhanesh BafnaFor Respondent: Shri Jasbir Chauhan
Section 143(3)Section 254(1)

…आयकर आयकर अपीलीय आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, ‘एल’ खंडपीठ अिधकरण खंडपीठ खंडपीठ मुंबई खंडपीठ मुंबई मुंबई मुंबई INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,MUMBAI “L” BENCH सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" राजे"", लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं एवं राम लाल नेगी राम लाल नेगी, , , , "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं एवं राम लाल नेगी राम लाल नेगी "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य Before S/Sh. Rajendra,Accountant Member & Ram Lal Negi,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं/.ITA No.8567/Mum/2010,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Assessment Year-1998-99 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Raytheon…

(v). Wockhardt Ltd. v. ACIT (10 Taxmann.com 208) — Cited in 20 Judgments | BharatTax