Vodafone BIFV v. Union of India

RATNA COMMERCIAL ENTERPRISES P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCITCIRCLR-20(1), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri N.K. Choudhryassessment Year: 2012-13 Ratna Commercial Enterprises P. Vs Dcit, Ltd., Circle-20(1), 4Th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, New Delhi. 10, Rouse Avenue, New Delhi. Pan: Aaacr0354B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri M.P. Rastogi, Advocate Revenue By : Shri T. Kipgen, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 31.01.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : .04.2022 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 12Th May, 2017 Of The Cit(A)-36, New Delhi, For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. Ground Of Appeal No.1 Raised By The Assessee Reads As Under:-

…ing the course of its business to the vendors for the purpose of business which is not recoverable, should be allowed either as business loss u/s 28 of the IT Act or bad debt u/s 36(1)(vii) of the Act:- 6 i) 46 ITR 649 (SC) CIT vs. Mysore Sugar Co. Ltd.; ii) 345 ITR 1 (Del) CIT vs. New Delhi Hotels Ltd.; & iii) 348 ITR 109 (Del) Mohan Meakin Ltd. vs. CIT 9. He accordingly submitted that since the advances so made by the assessee were in the course of real-estate business, therefore, the addition sustained by the CIT(A) is not in accordance with law and, therefore, the same should be deleted. 10. The ld. DR, on…

AIRPORT AUTHORITY OF INDIA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Sh. K. N. Charydr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 5162/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 5163/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Airports Authority Of India, Vs Income Tax Officer(Tds), Rajiv Gandhi Bhavan, Safdarjung Ward-1(1), Airport, New Delhi-110003 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaca6412D Assessee By : Sh. Ashish Gupta, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Sohail Malik, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 24.02.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 04.05.2021

…ervices will be provided by FAA. By no stretch of imagination, it can be said that all these are independent and separate agreements. This is particularly so after decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Vodafone International Holdings BV Netherlands vs UOI 345 ITR 1 (SC), wherein principle of look at and not look through’ has been prescribed. The ratio of said decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court has been followed by AAR in following recent decisions: - Roxar Maximum Reservoir Performance WLL (2012-TII-24-ARA- INTL) - Alstom Transport SA vs DIT (2012-T1I-28-ARA-INTL) Similarly, Hon’ble ITAT Kolkata has followed…

AIRPORT AUTHORITY OF INDIA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Sh. K. N. Charydr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 5162/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 5163/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Airports Authority Of India, Vs Income Tax Officer(Tds), Rajiv Gandhi Bhavan, Safdarjung Ward-1(1), Airport, New Delhi-110003 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaca6412D Assessee By : Sh. Ashish Gupta, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Sohail Malik, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 24.02.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 04.05.2021

…ervices will be provided by FAA. By no stretch of imagination, it can be said that all these are independent and separate agreements. This is particularly so after decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Vodafone International Holdings BV Netherlands vs UOI 345 ITR 1 (SC), wherein principle of look at and not look through’ has been prescribed. The ratio of said decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court has been followed by AAR in following recent decisions: - Roxar Maximum Reservoir Performance WLL (2012-TII-24-ARA- INTL) - Alstom Transport SA vs DIT (2012-T1I-28-ARA-INTL) Similarly, Hon’ble ITAT Kolkata has followed…

M/S. RATNA COMMERCIAL ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated above

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2010-11 Ratna Commercial Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Vs Addl. Cit, 4Th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, Range-15, 10, House Avenue, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aaacr0354B Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit, Vs. Ratna Commercial Enterprises Circle 21(1), Pvt. Ltd., 4Th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, New Delhi. 10, House Avenue, New Delhi. Pan: Aaacr0354B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri M.P. Rastogi, Advocate Revenue By : Shri J.K. Mishra, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 05.09.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.11.2019 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: These Are Cross Appeals. The First One Is Filed By The Assessee & The Second One By The Revenue & Are Directed Against The Order Dated 22Nd April, 2015 Of The Cit(A)-11, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2010-11. Ita No.3796/Del/2015 2. The Grounds Raised By The Revenue Read As Under:-

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : D : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2010-11 Ratna Commercial Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Vs Addl. CIT, 4th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, Range-15, 10, House Avenue, New Delhi. New Delhi. PAN: AAACR0354B Assessment Year: 2010-11 DCIT, Vs. Ratna Commercial Enterprises Circle 21(1), Pvt. Ltd., 4th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, New Delhi. 10, House Avenue, New Delhi. PAN: AAACR0354B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri M.P. Rastogi, Advocate Revenue by : Shri J.K. Mishra, CIT, DR Date of Hearing : 05.0…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. RATNA COMMERCIAL ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated above

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2010-11 Ratna Commercial Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Vs Addl. Cit, 4Th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, Range-15, 10, House Avenue, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aaacr0354B Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit, Vs. Ratna Commercial Enterprises Circle 21(1), Pvt. Ltd., 4Th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, New Delhi. 10, House Avenue, New Delhi. Pan: Aaacr0354B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri M.P. Rastogi, Advocate Revenue By : Shri J.K. Mishra, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 05.09.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.11.2019 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: These Are Cross Appeals. The First One Is Filed By The Assessee & The Second One By The Revenue & Are Directed Against The Order Dated 22Nd April, 2015 Of The Cit(A)-11, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2010-11. Ita No.3796/Del/2015 2. The Grounds Raised By The Revenue Read As Under:-

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : D : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2010-11 Ratna Commercial Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Vs Addl. CIT, 4th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, Range-15, 10, House Avenue, New Delhi. New Delhi. PAN: AAACR0354B Assessment Year: 2010-11 DCIT, Vs. Ratna Commercial Enterprises Circle 21(1), Pvt. Ltd., 4th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, New Delhi. 10, House Avenue, New Delhi. PAN: AAACR0354B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri M.P. Rastogi, Advocate Revenue by : Shri J.K. Mishra, CIT, DR Date of Hearing : 05.0…

NOKIA NETWORKS OY vs. ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

…cts namely:- “(i) The contract may be for work to be done for remuneration and for supply of materials used in the execution of the work for a price” 27. He also referred to the recent judgment of the Supreme Court in Vodafone BIFV Vs. Union of India, 345 ITR 1 wherein it is held that the Department must, for the purposes of income tax “look at” the contract in question, that is to say, the intention of the parties must be examined on the basis of the express terms and conditions of the contract and not by giving it an artificial construction or by dissecting the said agreement. It was submitted tha…

NOKIA NETWORKS OY vs. ASSTT. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

…cts namely:- “(i) The contract may be for work to be done for remuneration and for supply of materials used in the execution of the work for a price” 27. He also referred to the recent judgment of the Supreme Court in Vodafone BIFV Vs. Union of India, 345 ITR 1 wherein it is held that the Department must, for the purposes of income tax “look at” the contract in question, that is to say, the intention of the parties must be examined on the basis of the express terms and conditions of the contract and not by giving it an artificial construction or by dissecting the said agreement. It was submitted tha…

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. UOP LIC, NEW DELHI

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

…cts namely:- “(i) The contract may be for work to be done for remuneration and for supply of materials used in the execution of the work for a price” 27. He also referred to the recent judgment of the Supreme Court in Vodafone BIFV Vs. Union of India, 345 ITR 1 wherein it is held that the Department must, for the purposes of income tax “look at” the contract in question, that is to say, the intention of the parties must be examined on the basis of the express terms and conditions of the contract and not by giving it an artificial construction or by dissecting the said agreement. It was submitted tha…

ICEC INDIA P.LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

…cts namely:- “(i) The contract may be for work to be done for remuneration and for supply of materials used in the execution of the work for a price” 27. He also referred to the recent judgment of the Supreme Court in Vodafone BIFV Vs. Union of India, 345 ITR 1 wherein it is held that the Department must, for the purposes of income tax “look at” the contract in question, that is to say, the intention of the parties must be examined on the basis of the express terms and conditions of the contract and not by giving it an artificial construction or by dissecting the said agreement. It was submitted tha…

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. C.I.T ALCATEL

…cts namely:- “(i) The contract may be for work to be done for remuneration and for supply of materials used in the execution of the work for a price” 27. He also referred to the recent judgment of the Supreme Court in Vodafone BIFV Vs. Union of India, 345 ITR 1 wherein it is held that the Department must, for the purposes of income tax “look at” the contract in question, that is to say, the intention of the parties must be examined on the basis of the express terms and conditions of the contract and not by giving it an artificial construction or by dissecting the said agreement. It was submitted tha…

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. UOP LIC, NEW DELHI

…cts namely:- “(i) The contract may be for work to be done for remuneration and for supply of materials used in the execution of the work for a price” 27. He also referred to the recent judgment of the Supreme Court in Vodafone BIFV Vs. Union of India, 345 ITR 1 wherein it is held that the Department must, for the purposes of income tax “look at” the contract in question, that is to say, the intention of the parties must be examined on the basis of the express terms and conditions of the contract and not by giving it an artificial construction or by dissecting the said agreement. It was submitted tha…

DTE OF INCOME TAX vs. NOKIA NETWORK OY

…cts namely:- “(i) The contract may be for work to be done for remuneration and for supply of materials used in the execution of the work for a price” 27. He also referred to the recent judgment of the Supreme Court in Vodafone BIFV Vs. Union of India, 345 ITR 1 wherein it is held that the Department must, for the purposes of income tax “look at” the contract in question, that is to say, the intention of the parties must be examined on the basis of the express terms and conditions of the contract and not by giving it an artificial construction or by dissecting the said agreement. It was submitted tha…

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S NOKIA NETWORKS OY

…cts namely:- “(i) The contract may be for work to be done for remuneration and for supply of materials used in the execution of the work for a price” 27. He also referred to the recent judgment of the Supreme Court in Vodafone BIFV Vs. Union of India, 345 ITR 1 wherein it is held that the Department must, for the purposes of income tax “look at” the contract in question, that is to say, the intention of the parties must be examined on the basis of the express terms and conditions of the contract and not by giving it an artificial construction or by dissecting the said agreement. It was submitted tha…