How many judgments cite Vodafone India Services (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India?

172 judgments on BharatTax cite Vodafone India Services (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India (368 ITR 1), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Vodafone India Services (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 68, Section 147, Section 131, Section 144C(13), Section 148.

Vodafone India Services (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India

368 ITR 1High Court2014#563 most cited

What is Vodafone India Services (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India authority for?

The issue of shares and share premium is a capital account transaction, not an income-generating event, therefore Chapter X (Transfer Pricing) provisions are not attracted to deem notional or hypothetical income from such transactions.

172

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,368 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Vodafone India Services v. UOI · issue of shares · share premium · capital account transaction · transfer pricing · Chapter X applicability · international transaction · notional income · section 92 · section 56(2)(viib)

Also reported as

50 Taxmann.com 300228 Taxmann 25

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 68 Section 147 Section 131 Section 144C(13)Section 148 Section 263 Section 144C

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 56(1)section 92(1)section 56(2)(viib)dcf method onus of proof share capital and share premium source of source section 40a(2)(b)disallowance of interest expenditure share application money section 40a(2)section 92b

Judgments citing Vodafone India Services (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India

ITO 5 (2)(3), Mumbai vs. Millionaire Commodiities P.Ltd, Mumbai

Accordingly, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3268/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jul 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ram Lal Negiassessment Year : 2012-13 The Ito-5(2)(3), M/S.Millionaire Commodities Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai A-32, Haji Allarakha Building, Vs. 3Rd , 9Th Khetwadi Lane, Mumbai [Pan : Aahcm3086G] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri D.G.PansariFor Respondent: Shri Kiran Mehta &

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)Section 56(1)Section 68

…ndia Services Pvt. Ltd that the share premium is the balance sheet entry and is capital in nature. No capital receipt is taxable as income until it is expressly provided in the Act. The relevant part of the decision of Vodafone India Service Pvt. Ltd., (2014) 368 ITR 1(Bombay) is reproduced as under:- 25. But we have examined the issue afresh. The word income for the purpose of the Act has a well understood meaning as defined in Section 2(24) of the Act. This even when the definition in Section 2(24) of the Act is an inclusive definition. It cannot be disputed t income will not in its normal meaning include capit…

Techbooks International Pvt. Ltd., Noida vs. ACIT, Noida

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6102/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jul 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishitechbooks International Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Acit, Plot No. 37, Block-A, Circle-3, Sector-60, Gautam Budh Nagar, Noida Noida Pan: Aabct3774A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Manoneet Dalal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Mritunjoy Baranwal, Sr. DR

Section 234BSection 271Section 92Section 92B(1)

…stion of any notional/hypothetical interest income as has been determined by the TPO. To support the non-charging of interest, he relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Vodafone India Services (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India [2014] 368 ITR 1/[2015] 228 Taxman 25/[2014] 50 taxmann.com 300. He buttressed the same argument by relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court dated 27.3.2015 in CIT v. Cotton Naturals (I) (P.) Ltd. [2015] 55 taxmann.com 523/231 Taxman 401 (Delhi). The view canvassed by the ld. AR against the not making addition on account of interest was stro…

Voltas Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 8(3)(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 6612/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar() & Shri Ravish Sood () Assessment Year: 2012-13 Voltas Limited Asst. Cit Range-8(3)(2) Voltas House-A, 4Th Floor, Vs. Room No. 615, 6Th Floor, Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Road, Chinchpokli, Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai 400 033 Pan No. Aaacv2809D Appellant Respondent & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dcit-8(3)(2) Voltas Limited R. No.615, 6Th Floor, Vs. Voltas House-A, 4Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Road, Mumbai- 400 020 Chinchpokli, Mumbai 400 033 Pan No. Aaacv2809 Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri. Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri. Uodal Raj Singh, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40

…to in Sec. 92B of the Act, therefore, the transfer pricing provisions were not applicable. The CIT(A) in support of his said view relied on the judgment of the Hon‟ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Vodafone India Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Addl. CIT (2014) 368 ITR 1 (Bom). On the basis of his aforesaid observation the transfer pricing adjustment made by the TPO was vacated by the CIT(A). 5. The assessee being aggrieved with the order of the CIT(A) has carried the matter in appeal before us. As regards the additional disallowance u/s 14A r.w Rule 8D(2)(iii) of Rs. 1,84,51,905/-, it was submitted by the ld. A.R…

M/S. United Spirits Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

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

ITA 489/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 May 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleit(Tp)A No.489/Bang/2017 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) M/S. United Spirits Limited, Ub Towers, No.24, Vittal Mallya Road, Bangalore-560 001 ….Appellant Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 7(1)(1), Bangalore. ……Respondent. Assessee By: Shri Perci Pardiwala, Senior Advocate & Shri Ketan Ved, C.A. Revenue By: Shri Bipin C.N, Jcit (D.R) Date Of Hearing : 06.03.2020. Date Of Pronouncement : 29.05.2020. O R D E R Per Shri B.R. Baskaran, A.M. : The Assessee Has Filed This Appeal Challenging The Assessment Order Dated 31-01-2017 Passed By The Assessing Officer For Assessment Year 2012-13 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S 144C(13) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Perci Pardiwala, Senior Advocate and Shri Ketan Ved, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Bipin C.N, JCIT (D.R)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(10)Section 144C(13)Section 14ASection 154Section 36(1)(iii)Section 92C

…l transaction, the provisions of sec.92(1) shall not apply and hence no T.P adjustment could have been made. He submitted that the provisions of Chapter X have been held to be machinery provisions in the cases of Vodafone India Services (P) Ltd vs. UOI (2014)(368 ITR 1)(50 taxmann.com 300)(Bom) and Maruti Suzuki India Ltd vs. CIT (2015)(64 taxmann.com 150)(Delhi). The Ld A.R invited our attention to the following observations made by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Vodafone India Services (P) Ltd (supra) at paragraph 45 of its order:- “Chapter X of the Act is a machinery provision to arrive at the ALP of…

Essar Shipping Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT-5(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, ground No.10 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7371/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm Essar Shipping Ltd., Vs. A.C.I.T.-5(1)(2), 11, K.K. Marg, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai. Mumbai-400034. Pan/Gir No.Aacce 3707 D (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 115VSection 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM Essar Shipping Ltd., Vs. A.C.I.T.-5(1)(2), 11, K.K. Marg, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai. Mumbai-400034. PAN/GIR No.AACCE 3707 D (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Vijay Mehta (AR) Revenue by Ms. Nillu Jaggi (Jt.CIT) Date of Hearing 12/12/2019 Date of Pronouncement 06/03/2020 आदेश / O R D E R PER: R.C. SHARMA, A.M. This is the appeal filed by the assessee against the direction of the Dispute Resolution Panel-1(WZ), Mumbai (in short, the DRP) U/s 144C(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act) dated…

Nandalal Tolani Charitable Trust, Mumbai vs. ADIT (E) - II (2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6949/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jan 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am M/S. Nandlal Tolani Vs. Asst. Director Of Income Charitable Trust Tax (Exem.)Ii(2), Mumbai 10-A, Bakhtawar R.P.Goenka Marg Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021 Pan/Gir No. Aaatn0043Q (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(45)Section 24Section 45

…of income utilized for objects of the Trust. 2. The Learned A.O. as well as Learned CIT(A) have erred in not following the principles settled by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Vodafone 4 Ms. Nandalal Tolani Charitable Trust India Services Pvt. Ltd. 368 ITR 531 (Bom) (Page 544) which is binding on Department in Mumbai as law of the land wherein it is held that income chargeable to tax has to be computed u/s.l4 of the Act and therefore income from property has to be computed allowing deduction u/s.24(a) of the Act in the case of all assesses including charitable trusts. 3. The Learned A.O. as well as Lea…

DCIT 14(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Hindustan Construction Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 2432/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Hindustan Construction Co. Assistant Commissioner Of Ltd.,Hincon House, L.B.S. Vs. Income Tax-14(2)(1), Marg, Vikhroli (West), 4Th Floor, Aayakarbhavan, Mumbai-400083. New Marine Lines, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaach0968B Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 The D.C.I.T.-14(2)(1), Hindustan Construction 432, Aayakarbhavan, 4Th Vs. Co. Ltd.,Hincon House, 11Th Floor, M.K. Marg, Floor,247 Park, L.B.S. Mumbai-400020. Marg, Vikhroli (West), Mumbai-400083. Pan No. Aaach0968B Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. H.P. Mahajani / Ms. Shweta Mahadik, ARsFor Respondent: Mr. Anand Mohan, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)

…it change. Therefore, the decision of the ld.CIT(A) is contrary to the law explained by the coordinate bench decision in the case Tally solutions 160 ITD 465 (Bangalore Tribunal), which was considered jurisdictional High Court decision in the case of Vodafone 368 ITR 1 (Bombay). 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in deciding that the Corporate guarantee to EXIM Bank on behalf of HCC Mauritius Enterprises Limited, was not an international transaction without appreciating that the TPO has taken into consideration the benefits received by the AE and determined…

Hindustan Construction Co. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 14(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 2351/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2020AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Mr. H.P. Mahajani / Ms. Shweta Mahadik, ARsFor Respondent: Mr. Anand Mohan, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)

Gurgaon Investments Ltd, Mumbai vs. DDIT (It) 2(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, Appeals are allowed as indicated above

ITA 6821/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K.Pradhan

For Appellant: Shri Percy J. PardiwalaFor Respondent: Shri Suhas Kulkarni

…tion of determining the arm's length price of interest on CCDs on accrual/notional basis. In this context, he drew our attention to the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the following cases. i) Vodafone India Services Pvt. Ltd v/s DCIT, [2014] 368 ITR 1 (Ahd.); ii) DCIT v/d M/s. PMW ASPF I Cyprus Holding Co. Ltd. ITA no. 879/Del./2016, dated 09.08.2019. 5. The learned Departmental Representative strongly relying upon the observations of learned Commissioner (Appeals) submitted, the Transfer Pricing Officer is mandated under the act to determine the arm's length price of any international transact…

Exind Trading P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 6(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 351/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Ravish Sood: A.Y : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh ShahFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Gubgotra

Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 68

…are independent and cannot be read together. He further referred to the following case laws :- i. PCIT vs Apeak Infotech, 397 ITR 148 (Bom.) ii. Asiatic Oxygen Ltd. vs DCIT, 49 ITD 355 (Kol.) iii. Vodafone India Services Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India & Ors., (368 ITR 1) (Bom.) iv. CBDT Instruction No. 2/2015 dated 29.01.2015 v. ACIT vs Rajesh Digital Media Pvt. Ltd., ITA No. 6251/Mum/2017 dated 20.02.2019 vi. CIT vs Allahabad Bank Ltd., 73 ITR 745 (SC) vii. DCIT vs Finproject India (P) Ltd., 171 ITD 82 (Mum.) viii. Credit Suisse Business Analysis (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs ACIT, (72 taxmann.com 131) 6. The learned cou…

DCIT 1(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Goldman Sachs India P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby ordered to be dismissed

ITA 730/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.730/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Dy. Commissioner Of बिधम/ M/S. Goldman Sachs (I) Income-Tax 1(1)(2) Finance Pvt. Ltd. Vs. 579, Aayakar Bhawan, M.K. 951-A, Rational House, Road, Mumbai-400020. Appasaheb Marathe Marg, Mumbai-400025. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacp2448J (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Laxmi Vora Prasad Dude Assessee By: Shri Jehangir Mistry सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 18/07/2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 15/10/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 30.11.2015 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -2, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2009- 10. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: -

For Appellant: Shri Jehangir MistryFor Respondent: Shri Laxmi Vora Prasad Dude

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 56Section 56(1)Section 68Section 78

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.730/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Dy. Commissioner of बिधम/ M/s. Goldman Sachs (I) Income-tax 1(1)(2) Finance Pvt. Ltd. Vs. 579, Aayakar Bhawan, M.K. 951-A, Rational House, Road, Mumbai-400020. Appasaheb Marathe Marg, Mumbai-400025. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAACP2448J (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue by: Shri Laxmi Vora Prasad Dude Assessee by: Shri Jehangir Mistry सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing: 18/07/2019 घोषणा क…

Devas Multimedia Private Limited vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax

WP/11618/2016HC Karnataka27 Sept 2019

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice P.B. Bajanthri Writ Petition No.11618 Of 2016 (T-It) Between:

Section 142(4)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144CSection 263Section 92C

…issue to taxability of shares being issued at a premium has already been well settled. The Revenue had raised a similar issue regarding discrepancy in valuation of the share premium received in the case of Vodafone India Services (P) Ltd vs UOI (2014) 368 ITR 1 (Bom). A transfer 12 pricing adjustment was made to the valuation of the shares, holding that valuation of shares adopted by the assessee is incorrect. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in no uncertain terms laid down the law stating as under:- “25. But we have examined the issue afresh. The word income for the pu…

Kabeer Khan Cold Storage Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, ITO-5(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result the grounds of appeal raised by assessee are rejected

ITA 4484/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Pawan Singhshri Kabeer Khan Income Tax Officer 5(2)(2) Cold Storage Pvt Ltd. 33, Mumbai Vs. Jasmine Villa, Opposite, Ymca Ground , Mumbai-400008. Pan: Aaeck3490K Appellant Respondent Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri B. Srinivas Cit-Dr

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri B. Srinivas CIT-DR

Section 133(6)Section 143Section 254(1)Section 68

…During the first appellate stage the assessee made similar submissions and furnished similar documents, as furnished to the assessing officer. The assessee also relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Vodafone India Services Private Limited (368 ITR 1 Bombay). The contention of assessee was accepted by learned Commissioner (Appeals) holding that premium received in the taxable under the head “income from other sources” after amendment by Finance Act, 2012 under section 56(2)(vii) of the Act, if the shares exceed the fair market value. However, learned Commissioner (Appeals) accepted the conte…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 6(2), Mumbai vs. Khyati Realtors Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, therefore, petition succeeds and is allowed

ITA 4710/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jul 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh , Jm Dcit, Cir. 6(3)(2) Vs. M/S. Khyati Realtors Pvt.Ltd R.No.522, 5Th Floor 301/68, Manek Bhuvan 1St Hindu Colony Aayakar Bhavan M.K.Road, Dadar (E), Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 014 Pan/Gir No.Aacck4422B (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI M.BALAGANESH, AM & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH , JM DCIT, CIR. 6(3)(2) Vs. M/s. Khyati Realtors Pvt.Ltd R.No.522, 5th Floor 301/68, Manek Bhuvan 1st Hindu Colony Aayakar Bhavan M.K.Road, Dadar (E), Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 014 PAN/GIR No.AACCK4422B (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Revenue by Shri. B. Yadagiri Assessee by Shri Vijay Mehta & Shri Anuj Kisnadwala Date of Hearing 17/06/2019 Date of Pronouncement 17/07/2019 आदेश / O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH (A.M): This appeal in ITA No.4710/Mum/2017 for A.Y.2008-09 arises out of the order by the ld. Com…

Essar Ports Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT-6(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4444/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jun 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Pawan Singhessar Ports Ltd. Acit-6(2)(2), Essar House, 11, Keshavrao Room No. 563 (C), Vs. Khadye Marg, Mahalaxmi, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400034. M.K. Road, Pan: Aaace8391D Mumbai-400020 Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Vijay Mehta & Anuj Kisnadwala Ar’S Respondent By : Shri Mukundraj Chate Dr Date Of Hearing : 18.06.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.06.2019 Order Under Section 254(1)Of Income Tax Act

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta & Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Shri Mukundraj Chate DR

Section 115JSection 14Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 254(1)

…IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER Essar Ports Ltd. ACIT-6(2)(2), Essar House, 11, Keshavrao Room No. 563 (c), Vs. Khadye Marg, Mahalaxmi, 5th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400034. M.K. Road, PAN: AAACE8391D Mumbai-400020 Appellant Respondent Appellant by : Shri Vijay Mehta & Anuj Kisnadwala AR’s Respondent by : Shri Mukundraj Chate DR Date of Hearing : 18.06.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 26.06.2019 ORDER UNDER SECTION 254(1)OF INCOME TAX ACT PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER; 1. This appeal by assessee is direc…

Shilpa Shetty, Mumbai vs. ACIT CC 13, Mumbai

The appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 5433/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jun 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Singh-Ld. DR

Section 14ASection 92ASection 92CSection 92F

…. [2011] 334 ITR 69 (AAR) - Para 10 at Pg. 78 10 Shilpa Shetty Assessment Year-2011-12 vii. Vodafone India Services (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India [2013] 361 ITR 531 (Born HC) - Para 32 at Pg. 564 viii. Vodafone India Services (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India [2014] 368 ITR 1 (Born HC) - Para 24 (Pg. 30), 40 (Pg. 37-38) ix. Vodafone India Services (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India [2015] 369 ITR 511 (Born HC) - Para 8 at Pg. 515 x. Vodafone India Services (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [2016] 385 ITR 169 (Born HC) - Pg. 312 and 320 The Ld. AR further submitted that when the machinery provisions fail, then the charging provisions cannot be…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 5(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Van Oord India Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result department’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 10/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jun 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M.K Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri. Hiten ChandraFor Respondent: Shri. Sunil K Jha

Section 115V

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “J” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M.K AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA no.10/Mum./2018 (Assessment Year : 2011–12) Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Appellant 5(3)(2) Mumbai v/s M/s Van Oord India P. Ltd., 201, 2nd Floor, Kalina Central Plaza, CST Road, Kalina, Santacruz (E) Mumbai ……………. Respondent 400 098 PAN – AAACH5430J C.O no.5/Mum./2019 (Assessment Year : 2011–12) Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Appellant 5(3)(2) Mumbai v/s M/s Van Oord India P. Ltd., 201, 2nd Floor, Kalina Central Plaza, CST Road, Kalina, Santaxruz…

J.P Morgan Advisors India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 3(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

ITA 990/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Anand Mohan

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA no.990/Mum./2014 (Assessment Year : 2009–10) J.P. Morgan Advisors India Pvt. Ltd. J.P. Morgan Tower, Off CST Road ……………. Appellant Kalina, Santacruz (E), Mumbai 400 098 PAN – AABCJ4509K v/s Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Range–3(2), Mumbai IT(TP)A no.1754/Mum./2014 (Assessment Year : 2009–10) Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Appellant Range–3(2), Mumbai v/s J.P. Morgan Advisors India Pvt. Ltd. J.P. Morgan Tower, Off CST Road ……………. Respond…

Kss Ltd (Formerly Known As K Sera Sera Productions Ltd), Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 6(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1818/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jun 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Amarjit Singh (Jm)

Section 36(1)(iii)

…usion that there was no diversion of income and therefore, the transfer pricing provisions would have no applicability. The Tribunal referred to and relied upon the Judgment of this Court in the case of Vodafone Services Pvt Ltd Vs. Union of India reported in 368 ITR 1 (Bom). 11. The Tribunal concluded that in order to attract the provisions of Chapter X of the Act, there must be transaction or arrangement between two or more associated enterprises which gives rise to the income or benefit in the hands of at least one of them. The Tribunal noted that in the present case, the advance was not given to the AE but t…

Van Oord India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 5(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as above

ITA 7228/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 May 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year : 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Soli DasturFor Respondent: Shri. V. Justin

Section 115VSection 143(3)Section 250Section 28Section 43CSection 92Section 92CSection 92C(4)Section 92E

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “J”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2007-08 Van Oord India Private Limited, Assistant Commissioner of 201, 2nd Floor, Central Plaza, Income Tax - 5(3), Vs. 166, C.S.T. Road, Mumbai Mumbai [PAN : AAACH5430J] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Soli Dastur Shri. Nishant Thakkar Ms. Jasmin Amalsadvala Respondent by : Shri. V. Justin Smt. Malathi Sridharan Shri. Manish Kumar Singh Date of Hearing : 13-05-2019 Date of Pronouncement : 22-05-2019 O R D E R PER G.S. PANNU, VICE PRESID…