← All Phrases

“Section 209(1)(d)”

Section References (mined)Section 209Section 209(1)(d)30 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 209(1)(d) is National Petroleum Construction Company v. DIT (383 ITR 648), cited in 69 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 209(1)(d)

National Petroleum Construction Company v. DIT
383 ITR 648 · 2016 · High Court
69
citing judgments

An Indian agent providing marketing services, without the authority to conclude contracts on behalf of a foreign company, does not constitute a Dependent Agent Permanent Establishment (DAPE) for the foreign company in India under DTAA provisions.

Linde AG, Linde Engineering Division v. DDIT
365 ITR 1 · 2014 · High Court
55
citing judgments

When contractual obligations are for an entire project, only the income reasonably attributable to operations carried on in India is deemed to accrue or arise in India and falls within the tax net. This principle applies even in consortium arrangements where members have broader contractual roles, and income from supply of equipment should be characterized appropriately.

Trib.) 4) TVM Limited v. Commissioner of Income-tax
237 ITR 230 · 1999 · Reported
47
citing judgments

A non-resident entity's activities in India are assessed for Permanent Establishment (PE) under Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements, considering types like fixed place, construction, and agency PE, and the applicability of presumptive taxation under sections such as 44BBB.

Ishikawajma-Harima Heavy Industries Ltd. v. DIT
237 CTR 438 · 2011 · High Court
21
citing judgments

Income from offshore supply is not taxable in India if the Permanent Establishment (PE) in India had no role in securing or facilitating that supply. The separate nature of offshore and onshore contracts is relevant to this determination.

Totgars, Co-operative Sale Society Ltd. v. Income-tax Officer, Karnataka
229 CTR 209 · 2010 · Supreme Court
15
citing judgments

The Supreme Court decision in Totgars Co-operative Sale Society Ltd. v. Income-tax Officer clarifies the eligibility for deduction under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, specifically concerning interest income earned by cooperative societies from their investments or deposits, distinguishing between deductions under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) and 80P(2)(d).

DDIT v. Mitsui & Co Ltd.
118 Taxmann.com 379 · 2020 · High Court
14
citing judgments

Section 44BBB of the Act cannot be applied to income from offshore supplies if the supplies were made outside India without the involvement of a Permanent Establishment in India. Treaty provisions may also preclude such taxation.

Scotts Ltd: 31 Taxman 444 (Cal), CIT v. Hyundai Heavy Industries Co Ltd.
265 CTR 109 · High Court
10
citing judgments

The case is authority for the principle that where an Indian entity is given authority to execute local work but overall responsibility remains with a foreign entity, this does not necessarily constitute a consortium, and the foreign entity's liability should be assessed based on the specific contractual terms.

Judgments citing Section 209(1)(d)

Shri Pawan Kumar Ruia., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir- 30, Kolkata.

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1197/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No.1197/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Pawan Kumar Ruia…..…….…....…………….......…....………....Appellant 5, Sunny Park, Kolkata – 700019. [Pan: Acnpr3823K] Vs. Dcit, Circle-30, Kolkata.......................................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Manoj Kataruka, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Sailen Samadder, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 30, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 23, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 11.09.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Sole Issue Involved In This Appeal Is Relating Non-Credits Of Tds Of Rs.95,80,949/- Out Of Total Tds Claim Of Rs.2,18,82,526/-. 3. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Derived Salary Income & Income From Other Sources. The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income On 17.07.2014 Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.6,52,52,390/-. The Assessment Was Completed U/S 143(3) Vide Order Dated 17.12.2016 At A Total Income Of Rs.6,86,66,708/-. The Assessee

Section 143(3)Section 250

duly deducted tax at source but not paid the same to the exchequer. Albeit gap between 'tax which would be deductible' as per section 209(1)(d) and 'tax deducted at source' has been abridged by insertion of proviso to section 209(1), but the open space between