Vodafone Idea Ltd. (formerly Vodafone Essar\nSouth Ltd.) v. DCIT (IT)

457 ITR 189High Court2023#7632 most cited
15

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2024 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 12Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 153Section 3(2)Section 5

Issues it is cited on

section 35ddsection 35abbsection 206awaiver of loansection 206aause of equipmentsection 40a(ia)clarificatory amendmentazadi bachao andolanshort deduction of taxsection 80ia(4)section 194h

Judgments citing Vodafone Idea Ltd. (formerly Vodafone Essar\nSouth Ltd.) v. DCIT (IT)

RELIANCE JIO INFOCOMM USA INC.,TEXAS vs. DCIT (IT) 4 (1) (1), MUMBAI

In the result appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 2991/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Apr 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth ()

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 153Section 9(1)(vi)Section 9(1)(vii)

…9(1)(vii) of the Act as well as Article 12 of India U/S. DTAA. 6.1. The Ld.AR submitted that the issue is now covered by various orders of this Tribunal, the details of which are as under:- Sr. No. Particulars Page Nos. 1. Vodafone Idea Ltd. v. DDIT [2023] 457 ITR 189 (Kar HC) 1-10 2. DDIT v. Vodafone Idea Ltd. [2024] 469 ITR 391 (SC) 11-12 3. DDIT v. Vodafone Idea Ltd. [2025] 306 Taxman 267 (SC) 13-15 11 I.T.A. No. 2991/Mum/2023 4. Telefonica UK Ltd. v. DCIT [2023] 203 ITD 171 (Mumbai - Trib.) 16-23 5. Telefonica Depreciation Espana SA v. ACIT(IT) [2023) 154 taxmann.com 436 24-38 (Bangalore - Trib.) 6. Al Te…

DCIT-5(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S VODAFONE IDEA LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the ground no

ITA 2987/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2015-16
Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…y requires manual intervention resulting in the same to be fee for\ntechnical services/professional services. Further, it is observed that the Hon'ble\nKarnataka High Court in the case of Vodafone Idea Ltd. (formerly Vodafone Essar\nSouth Ltd.) vs. DCIT (IT) [457 ITR 189 (Karnataka HC)], has categorically held the\nsame to be without human intervention and not to be termed as technical service as the\nsame is fully automatic requiring no human intervention. Notably, the SLP filed against\nthe said order was dismissed by the Hon'ble Apex Court relying on the decision of the\nCIT vs. G. India Technological Pvt. Ltd…

VODAFONE IDEA LIMITED (FORMERLY IDEA CELLULAR LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT - 14(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the ground no

ITA 2150/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2015-16
Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…y requires manual intervention resulting in the same to be fee for\ntechnical services/professional services. Further, it is observed that the Hon'ble\nKarnataka High Court in the case of Vodafone Idea Ltd. (formerly Vodafone Essar\nSouth Ltd.) vs. DCIT (IT) [457 ITR 189 (Karnataka HC)], has categorically held the\nsame to be without human intervention and not to be termed as technical service as the\nsame is fully automatic requiring no human intervention. Notably, the SLP filed against\nthe said order was dismissed by the Hon'ble Apex Court relying on the decision of the\nCIT vs. G. India Technological Pvt. Ltd…

DCIT - 14(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. IDEA CELLULAR LTD., MUMBAI

ITA 2180/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2014-15
Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…y requires manual intervention resulting in the same to be fee for\ntechnical services/professional services. Further, it is observed that the Hon'ble\nKarnataka High Court in the case of Vodafone Idea Ltd. (formerly Vodafone Essar\nSouth Ltd.) vs. DCIT (IT) [457 ITR 189 (Karnataka HC)], has categorically held the\nsame to be without human intervention and not to be termed as technical service as the\nsame is fully automatic requiring no human intervention. Notably, the SLP filed against\nthe said order was dismissed by the Hon'ble Apex Court relying on the decision of the\nCIT vs. G. India Technological Pvt. Ltd…

DCIT - 14(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. IDEA CELLULAR LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the ground no

ITA 2179/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2013-14
Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…y requires manual intervention resulting in the same to be fee for\ntechnical services/professional services. Further, it is observed that the Hon'ble\nKarnataka High Court in the case of Vodafone Idea Ltd. (formerly Vodafone Essar\nSouth Ltd.) vs. DCIT (IT) [457 ITR 189 (Karnataka HC)], has categorically held the\nsame to be without human intervention and not to be termed as technical service as the\nsame is fully automatic requiring no human intervention. Notably, the SLP filed against\nthe said order was dismissed by the Hon'ble Apex Court relying on the decision of the\nCIT vs. G. India Technological Pvt. Ltd…

DCIT - 14(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. IDEA CELLULAR LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the ground no

ITA 2178/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2011-12
Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…y requires manual intervention resulting in the same to be fee for\ntechnical services/professional services. Further, it is observed that the Hon'ble\nKarnataka High Court in the case of Vodafone Idea Ltd. (formerly Vodafone Essar\nSouth Ltd.) vs. DCIT (IT) [457 ITR 189 (Karnataka HC)], has categorically held the\nsame to be without human intervention and not to be termed as technical service as the\nsame is fully automatic requiring no human intervention. Notably, the SLP filed against\nthe said order was dismissed by the Hon'ble Apex Court relying on the decision of the\nCIT vs. G. India Technological Pvt. Ltd…

IDEA CELLULAR LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT - 14(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the ground no

ITA 1777/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2014-15
Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…y requires manual intervention resulting in the same to be fee for\ntechnical services/professional services. Further, it is observed that the Hon'ble\nKarnataka High Court in the case of Vodafone Idea Ltd. (formerly Vodafone Essar\nSouth Ltd.) vs. DCIT (IT) [457 ITR 189 (Karnataka HC)], has categorically held the\nsame to be without human intervention and not to be termed as technical service as the\nsame is fully automatic requiring no human intervention. Notably, the SLP filed against\nthe said order was dismissed by the Hon'ble Apex Court relying on the decision of the\nCIT vs. G. India Technological Pvt. Ltd…

VODAFONE IDEA LIMITED (FORMERLY IDEA CELLULAR LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT - 14(2)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 1776/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2013-14
Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…y requires manual intervention resulting in the same to be fee for\ntechnical services/professional services. Further, it is observed that the Hon'ble\nKarnataka High Court in the case of Vodafone Idea Ltd. (formerly Vodafone Essar\nSouth Ltd.) vs. DCIT (IT) [457 ITR 189 (Karnataka HC)], has categorically held the\nsame to be without human intervention and not to be termed as technical service as the\nsame is fully automatic requiring no human intervention. Notably, the SLP filed against\nthe said order was dismissed by the Hon'ble Apex Court relying on the decision of the\nCIT vs. G. India Technological Pvt. Ltd…

IDEA CELLULAR LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT - 14(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the ground no

ITA 1775/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2011-12
Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…y requires manual intervention resulting in the same to be fee for\ntechnical services/professional services. Further, it is observed that the Hon'ble\nKarnataka High Court in the case of Vodafone Idea Ltd. (formerly Vodafone Essar\nSouth Ltd.) vs. DCIT (IT) [457 ITR 189 (Karnataka HC)], has categorically held the\nsame to be without human intervention and not to be termed as technical service as the\nsame is fully automatic requiring no human intervention. Notably, the SLP filed against\nthe said order was dismissed by the Hon'ble Apex Court relying on the decision of the\nCIT vs. G. India Technological Pvt. Ltd…

DCIT - 14(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. IDEA CELLULAR LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the ground no

ITA 5945/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2012-13
Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…y requires manual intervention resulting in the same to be fee for\ntechnical services/professional services. Further, it is observed that the Hon'ble\nKarnataka High Court in the case of Vodafone Idea Ltd. (formerly Vodafone Essar\nSouth Ltd.) vs. DCIT (IT) [457 ITR 189 (Karnataka HC)], has categorically held the\nsame to be without human intervention and not to be termed as technical service as the\nsame is fully automatic requiring no human intervention. Notably, the SLP filed against\nthe said order was dismissed by the Hon'ble Apex Court relying on the decision of the\nCIT vs. G. India Technological Pvt. Ltd…

IDEA CELLULAR LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT HQ (JUDL.) TO CIT-14, MUMBAI

In the result, the ground no

ITA 5765/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2012-13
Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…y requires manual intervention resulting in the same to be fee for\ntechnical services/professional services. Further, it is observed that the Hon'ble\nKarnataka High Court in the case of Vodafone Idea Ltd. (formerly Vodafone Essar\nSouth Ltd.) vs. DCIT (IT) [457 ITR 189 (Karnataka HC)], has categorically held the\nsame to be without human intervention and not to be termed as technical service as the\nsame is fully automatic requiring no human intervention. Notably, the SLP filed against\nthe said order was dismissed by the Hon'ble Apex Court relying on the decision of the\nCIT vs. G. India Technological Pvt. Ltd…

KDDI CORPORATION,JAPAN vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE 2(1), BANGALORE, BANGALORE

ITA 811/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubeyit(It)A No.811/Bang/2024 & Sp No.22/Bang/2024

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 147Section 201Section 9Section 9(1)(vi)

…reement ("DTAA"). 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. DRP/AO has erred in not following the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in case of Vodafone Idea Limited v. DDIT (International Taxation) [(2023) 457 ITR 189 (Karnataka)] holding that payment for interconnect usage charge is not chargeable to tax as 'royalty'. 5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. DRP has erred in holding that the interconnect usage charges would fall under residuary Article 22 of India — Japan DTAA. 6. On the facts and in the circumstances of the ca…

KDDI CORPORATION,JAPAN vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE 2(1), BANGALORE, KARNATAKA, JAPAN

ITA 102/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahus.P. Nos. 7 To 9/Bang/2024 (In It(It)A Nos. 100 To 102/Bang/2024) & It(It)A Nos. 100 To 102/Bang/2024

For Appellant: Shri Arjit Prasad, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Subash K R, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(3)Section 147Section 148Section 201

…d Not Pressed On the facts and in the circumstances of the case & in law, the Ld. DRP/AO erred in not following the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Ground-4 Vodafone Idea Limited v. DDIT (International Taxation) [(2023) 457 ITR 189 (Karnataka)] holding that payment for interconnect usage charge is not chargeable to tax as 'royalty'. Grounds on Merit Pressed Ground-5 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case & in law, the Ld. DRP erred in holding that the interconnect usage charges would fall under residuary Article 22 of India - Japan DTAA. Ground-6 On the facts and…

KDDI CORPORATION,JAPAN vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE 2(1), BANGALORE, KARNATAKA, BANGALORE

ITA 101/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Apr 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahus.P. Nos. 7 To 9/Bang/2024 (In It(It)A Nos. 100 To 102/Bang/2024) & It(It)A Nos. 100 To 102/Bang/2024

For Appellant: Shri Arjit Prasad, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Subash K R, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(3)Section 147Section 148Section 201

…Merit Pressed On the facts and in the circumstances of the case & in law, the Ld. DRP/AO erred in not following the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Ground-4 Vodafone Idea Limited v. DDIT (International Taxation) [(2023) 457 ITR 189 (Karnataka)] holding that payment for interconnect usage charge is not chargeable to tax as 'royalty'. Ground-5 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case & in law, the Ld. DRP erred in holding that the interconnect usage charges would fall under residuary Article 22 of India - Japan DTAA. Ground-6 On the facts and in the circumstances of…

KDDI CORPORATION,JAPAN vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE 2(1), BANGALORE, KARNATAKA, BANGALORE

ITA 100/BANG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahus.P. Nos. 7 To 9/Bang/2024 (In It(It)A Nos. 100 To 102/Bang/2024) & It(It)A Nos. 100 To 102/Bang/2024

For Appellant: Shri Arjit Prasad, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Subash K R, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(3)Section 147Section 148Section 201

…Merit Pressed On the facts and in the circumstances of the case & in law, the Ld. DRP/AO erred in not following the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Ground-4 Vodafone Idea Limited v. DDIT (International Taxation) [(2023) 457 ITR 189 (Karnataka)] holding that payment for interconnect usage charge is not chargeable to tax as 'royalty'. Ground-5 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case & in law, the Ld. DRP erred in holding that the interconnect usage charges would fall under residuary Article 22 of India - Japan DTAA. Ground-6 On the facts and in the circumstances of…