← All Phrases

“Section 5(2)”

Section References (mined)Section 5Section 5(2)355 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 5(2) is 279 ITR 331/149 Taxman 15 (Guj.); 5. CIT v. Sabari Enterprises (298 ITR 141), cited in 706 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 5(2)

279 ITR 331/149 Taxman 15 (Guj.); 5. CIT v. Sabari Enterprises
298 ITR 141 · 2008 · High Court
706
citing judgments

Employee contributions to provident fund or ESI, even if deposited after the due date specified in the respective welfare statutes, are allowable as a deduction under Section 36(1)(va) if paid before the due date for filing the income-tax return. This judgment aligns the treatment of employee contributions with employer contributions under Section 43B.

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Nova Promoters and Finlease (P) Ltd.
342 ITR 169 · 2012 · High Court
658
citing judgments

To make an addition under Section 68 for unexplained cash credits, the Assessing Officer must conduct proper inquiry into the identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of the creditor, especially concerning share application money. The assessee's initial discharge of burden by providing necessary details shifts the onus back to the AO for further investigation, including the source of source.

Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT
384 ITR 490 · 2016 · High Court
631
citing judgments

Co-operative banks are not fundamentally different from co-operative societies, entitling them to claim deductions under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961, including for interest income treated as business income.

CIT v. Ghanshyam (HUF)
315 ITR 1 · 2009 · Supreme Court
363
citing judgments

Interest received under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, is considered part of the enhanced compensation on compulsory acquisition of land. It is taxable as 'capital gains' and not separately as 'interest income' under the head Income from Other Sources.

Shyam Sunder v. Ram Kumar, (2001) 8 SCC 24 (para 44); Brij Mohan Das Laxman Das v. CIT
5 SCC 482 · 1997 · Supreme Court
261
citing judgments

For income to be assessable under the head 'Income from House Property' as per Section 22 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, beneficial ownership or the right to enjoy the property is sufficient; legal ownership is not a mandatory prerequisite.

CIT v. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft
310 ITR 320 · 2009 · High Court
259
citing judgments

Reimbursements of actual expenses without any profit element are not taxable income. Additionally, mere amendments to the Income-tax Act do not override the provisions of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements (DTAAs).

Rama Bai v. CIT
181 ITR 400 · 1990 · Supreme Court
258
citing judgments

Interest income is taxable on either an accrual or cash basis, determined by accounting principles. This method was applicable prior to legislative changes that simplified the taxation of interest income.

CIT v. Govindbhai Mamaiya
91 Taxmann.com 20 · 2018 · Supreme Court
205
citing judgments

Interest on enhanced compensation received under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, is considered part of the compensation, not merely interest income, and is exigible to tax on a receipt basis.

Judgments citing Section 5(2)

Kpmg Assurance and Consulting Services LLP, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-Circle-16(2), Mumbai

Accordingly, Ground No. 5 & 6 raised by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2413/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "I" BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

resident the total income of a previous year is to be determined as per the scope of total income specified in Section 5(2) of the Act read with deeming provisions contained in Section 9 of the Act. 13.4. As per Section 9(1)(vii) of the Act income

Kpmg Assurance and Consulting Services LLP, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax -16(2), Mumbai

ITA 2411/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

resident the total income of a previous year is to be determined as per the scope of total income specified in Section 5(2) of the Act read with deeming provisions contained in Section 9 of the Act. 13.4. As per Section 9(1)(vii) of the Act income

DCIT, Cir 16(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Kpmg Assurance and Consulting Services LLP, Mumbai

ITA 2277/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

resident the total income of a previous year is to be determined as per the scope of total income specified in Section 5(2) of the Act read with deeming provisions contained in Section 9 of the Act. 13.4. As per Section 9(1)(vii) of the Act income

DCIT, Cir 16(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Kpmg Assurance and Consulting Services LLP, Mumbai

Accordingly, Ground No. 5 & 6 raised by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2274/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "I" BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

resident the total income of a previous year is to be determined as per the scope of total income specified in Section 5(2) of the Act read with deeming provisions contained in Section 9 of the Act. 13.4. As per Section 9(1)(vii) of the Act income

DCIT, Cir 16(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Kpmg Assurance and Consulting Services LLP, Mumbai

ITA 2273/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

resident the total income of a previous year is to be determined as per the scope of total income specified in Section 5(2) of the Act read with deeming provisions contained in Section 9 of the Act. 13.4. As per Section 9(1)(vii) of the Act income

Income Tax Officer, Greams Road Income Tax Office vs. K Ansari, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals stand dismissed

ITA 1358/CHNY/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Aug 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.1357/Chny/2023 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2008-09) & 2. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.1358/Chny/2023 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Ito Mr. K. Ansari बनाम/ #6/1, Parameshwari Nagar International Taxation Ward -1(1) Vs. 4Th Street, Adyar, Chennai-600 020. Chennai-6. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Akhpa-5381-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan (Addl.Cit)-Ld. Sr. Dr " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri B. Ramakrishnan (Fca)-Ld.Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19-06-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 07-08-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

For Appellant: Shri AR V Sreenivasan (Addl.CIT)-Ld. Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri B. Ramakrishnan (FCA)-Ld.AR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ‘ए’ "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय +ी मनोज कुमार

Income Tax Officer, Income Tax Department Greams Road vs. K Ansari, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals stand dismissed

ITA 1357/CHNY/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Aug 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.1357/Chny/2023 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2008-09) & 2. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.1358/Chny/2023 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Ito Mr. K. Ansari बनाम/ #6/1, Parameshwari Nagar International Taxation Ward -1(1) Vs. 4Th Street, Adyar, Chennai-600 020. Chennai-6. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Akhpa-5381-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan (Addl.Cit)-Ld. Sr. Dr " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri B. Ramakrishnan (Fca)-Ld.Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19-06-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 07-08-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

For Appellant: Shri AR V Sreenivasan (Addl.CIT)-Ld. Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri B. Ramakrishnan (FCA)-Ld.AR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ‘ए’ "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय +ी मनोज कुमार

Eximcorp India (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir-5(2), Kolkata.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 702/KOL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 115JSection 195Section 195(1)Section 2Section 40

from the High Court judgement (261 ITR 113- Gujarat) deserve to be extracted: “The provisions of section 9(1)(v)(b), read with section 5(2) and section 4(1)(2) leave no room for doubt that the income payable by way of interest by a resident ... resident in India under section 9(1)(v)(b) and would be chargeable to income- tax under section 4(1), read with section 5(2). If that be so, income-tax thereon would be deductible at source under section 195(1). [Para 9.2] Page 10 of 20 I.T.A

Eximcorp India Private Limited., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir-5(2), Kolkata.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 701/KOL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 115JSection 195Section 195(1)Section 2Section 40

from the High Court judgement (261 ITR 113- Gujarat) deserve to be extracted: “The provisions of section 9(1)(v)(b), read with section 5(2) and section 4(1)(2) leave no room for doubt that the income payable by way of interest by a resident ... resident in India under section 9(1)(v)(b) and would be chargeable to income- tax under section 4(1), read with section 5(2). If that be so, income-tax thereon would be deductible at source under section 195(1). [Para 9.2] Page 10 of 20 I.T.A

Alan Moses Mozes, Mumbai vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Intl. Taxn., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 542/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Kapoor, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ankit Jain, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 10(4)(ii)Section 5(2)Section 6(1)Section 69A

assessee from his own bank account in India can not be considered income the addition made by the department overriding the provision of Section 5(2),6,9 of the Income Tax Act 1961 is prayed to be deleted.” 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee ... channel, it could be said that onus on assessee under Section 69 stood discharged and, therefore, it was not taxable in India under Section 5(2)(b). In the case of Iqbal Ismail Virani v. ITO 128 taxmann.com 181 (Panaji - Trib.), the ITAT held that money brought in India

Shri Santanu Sanyal, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir. 2(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 41/KOL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Pradip Kumar Choubey

Section 144Section 250

rendered in United Kingdom amounting to INR 4,839,078 which does not form part of the total income of the Appellant under section 5(2) of the Act, as the Appellant qualifies as a Non-resident in India during the Previous Year (‘PY’) 2015- 16.” As I have already ... this view that the foreign allowance of INR 48,39,078 does not fall within the scope of total income under section 5(2) of the Act. We further find that the foreign assignment allowance was paid by IBM India to the International Travel Card outside India. The said card

Hyundai Transys Inc, Republic of Korea vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Tax, Corporate Circle 1(1), Chennai

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 338/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.338/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-2016) Hyundai Transys Inc, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of 105, Sindang Income Tax, 1 Ro Seongyeon, International Tax, Myeon, Corporate Circle 1(1) Seosan, Ccn 356851 Chennai. Korea.

For Appellant: Shri. R. Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. ARV Srinivasan, IRS, Addl.CIT
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 195Section 5Section 5(2)Section 9Section 9(1)(i)

received by the Appellant amounting to INR 3,908,249 accrues and arises in India and is liable to tax in India under section 5(2) r.w.s section 9(1)(i) of the Act at the rate of 40 percent plus applicable surcharge and cess

Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT(International Tax) 1(1)(2), Mumbai

ITA 2751/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Hon'Bleι.Τ.Α. No. 2751/Mum/2024

For Appellant: Shri Anish Thacker & Shri Nishit Shah, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Nihar Ranjan Samal, Sr. D/R
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 234ASection 5(2)Section 9(1)Section 9(1)(v)

Appellant (foreign company) on Foreign Currency External Commercial Borrowing Loans (ECB loans) granted to Indian borrowers was taxable in India under section 5(2) of the Act merely because the borrowers are resident in India; even though loan agreements were entered into outside India, loan proceeds were utilized ... that chargeability of interest incomes of non-residents is specifically governed by section 9(1)(v) of the Act and therefore, provisions of section 5(2) of the Act ought not to have been invoked; 8. failed to appreciate that the interest income is not chargeable to tax in India

Pralay Pradyotkanti Ghosh, Ahmedabad vs. Income -Tax Officer, Ward-1, International Taxation, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 298/AHD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member आयकर अपील सं /Ita No.298/Ahd/2022 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2018-19 Pralay Pradyotkanti Ghosh The Ito बनाम/ 22, Konark Society Ward-1 Nr. Railway Colony International Taxation V/S. Jawahar Chowk, Sabarmati Ahmedabad Ahmedabad – 380 019 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Abypg 6172 C (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Bandish Soparkar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 27/06/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/07/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee As Against The Order Passed By The Ld.Commissioner Of Income-Tax(Appeals)-13, Ahmedabad [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Ld.Cit(A)”], Dated 01/06/2022, Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 143(3) R.W.S.144C(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act") Dated 22/10/2021 Relevant To The Assessment Year (Ay) 2018-19. Pralay Pradyotkanti Ghosh Vs. Ito (Intl.Taxation) Asst. Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 192Section 2Section 5(2)(b)

with the explanation submitted by the assessee, the Assessing Officer, added back Rs.61,74,262/- to the total income of the assessee under section 5(2)(b) r.w.s. 9(1)(ii) of the Income Tax Act. 3. The assessee filed an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), who dismissed the appeal ... appellant has claimed to be a non-resident which has not been disputed by the AO, hence is covered under the scope of section 5(2) of the Act which states as under: "Scope of total income. 5. (1) Subject to the provisions of this Act, the total income

DCIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Elitecore Technologies Private Limited, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1728/AHD/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member आयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1728/Ahd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-12 The Dy.Cit Elitecore Technologies Pvt.Ltd. Circle-2(1)(1) बनाम/ (Now Merged With Sterlite Ahmedabad Technolgies Limited) V/S. 904, Silicon Tower, B/H. Pariseema Building Off. C.G. Road Ahmedabad, Gujarat-380 009 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaace 6815G (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Dhinal Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 27/06/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/07/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue As Against The Order Passed By The Ld.Commissioner Of Income-Tax(Appeals)-10, Ahmedabad [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Ld.Cit(A)”], Dated 04/09/2019, Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 143(3) Dcit Vs. Elitecore Technologies Pvt.Ltd. Asst. Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Dhinal Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 195Section 250Section 40Section 92C

since the income derived by these parties, to whom payment was made, is from the source in India, in terms of provisions of section 5(2)(b) of the Act, this income is deemed to accrue or arise in India and since the assessee has failed to withhold

Smt. Shanti A. Motwane, Mumbai vs. Int Tax Ward 3(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 1739/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal & Smt. Renu Jauhrismt. Shanti A. Motwane V/S. Int Tax Ward 3(2)(1), C/O Advocate, Moti B. बनाम Air India Building, Totlani (A.R.) Nariman Point, Office No. A405 & A406, Mumbai-400021 4Th Floor, Ramji House, 30, J.S.S. Road, Jambulwadi, Mumbai-400002 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर C/सं./Pan/Gir No: Ajmpm9118L Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Shri Moti B. TotlaniFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sant
Section 142(1)Section 144CSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 54Section 54F

only condition was that sale proceeds should be invested in a residential property within the stipulated period of time. 8. Reliance upon Section 5(2) of the Act to suggest that the amendment to Section 54(F) of the Act was merely clarificatory in nature does not aid Respondents. Undoubtedly ... apply to future periods. 10. In the context of the above-mentioned position of settled law, we have examined the interplay of Section 5(2) and Section 54(F) of the Act, prior and post-amendment. As reproduced above, Section 5(2) of the Act starts with the words, 'subject

Ahlers India Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Corp Circle 1(1), Chennai

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

ITA 524/CHNY/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 524/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 Ahlers India Pvt. Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner No.39, 2Nd Floor, Vs. Of Income Tax,, The Trapezium, Corporate Circle 1(1), Nelson Manickam Road, Chennai. Aminjikarai, Chennai – 600 029. Pan: Aaeca 5688H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27.06.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 27.06.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Arising Out Of The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi In Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023- 24/1059291012 (1) Dated 02.01.2024. The Assessment Was Framed By The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Company Circle 1(1), Chennai For The Assessment Year 2010-11 U/S.143(3) R.W.S. 144C Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’) Vide Order Dated 16.02.2016. The Impugned Giving Effect To The Order Of The Tribunal Was Framed By The Dcit, Corporate Circle 1(1), Chennai Vide Order Dated 22.08.2017. 2. The Only Issue In This Appeal Of Assessee Is Against The Order Of Cit(A)-Nfac Confirming The Action Of The Ao In Disallowing Expenses Paid To Various Non-Resident Parties For Non-Deduction Of Tds By Invoking The Provisions Of Section 40(A)(I) Of The Act Amounting To Rs.2,26,73,426/-. This Is The Only Limited Issue On Merits But Assessee Has Raised Various Other Issues Of Proper Opportunity Etc., Which Will Be Dealt With Later.

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.CIT
Section 143(3)Section 201(1)Section 40

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ,चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी महावीर "सह, उपा"य

Swami Rameshwar Anandagiri Purna, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-2(1) Int Taxation, Gurugram

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 395/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 5(2)Section 69

received in India nor income accrues or arises or is deemed to accrue or arise to him in India in view of Section 5(2) of the Act. 3.3 without appreciating that appellant has provided identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of transaction with sufficient evidence regarding source of loan such

Denso International Asia Co., Ltd., Thailand vs. ACIT, Circle International Tax 1(2)(2), New Delhi

The appeal is allowed and the impugned addition quashed

ITA 1985/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON'BLE (Vice President), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, Advocate; and Ms Sumisha Murgai &For Respondent: Shri Vijay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 253(1)Section 5(2)Section 9(1)(vii)

covered under clause 3 of Article 22 of the DTAA. Further, such receipts will be taxed at 10% as per section 5(2) read with section 9(1)(vii) of the Act. 3. The appellant is in appeal before this Tribunal, raising following grounds:- “Appeal under section

Blackline Systems, Inc., California, United States vs. ACIT, Circle 1(1)(2), International Taxation, New Delhi, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3798/DEL/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jun 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Sh. Nageshwar Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

support and on demand professional support to the vendors. Such services are purely technical in nature and as per the source rule under Section 5(2), 9(1)(vii) of the Act read with Article 12(4) of India USA DTAA partakes the nature FIS/FTS. The vendor has also deducted