← All Phrases

“Section 12(4)”

Section References (mined)Section 12Section 12(4)11 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 12(4) is CIT v. De Beers India Minerals (P.) Ltd. (346 ITR 467), cited in 371 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 12(4)

CIT v. De Beers India Minerals (P.) Ltd.
346 ITR 467 · 2012 · High Court
371
citing judgments

For fees for technical or consultancy services to 'make available' technical knowledge or know-how under a DTAA, the service must transmit such knowledge, allowing the recipient to derive an enduring benefit and utilize it independently in the future.

Shelf Drilling Ron Tappmeyer Ltd. v. ACIT\n(Intl. Taxation)
153 Taxmann.com 162 · 2023 · High Court
169
citing judgments

The time consumed in proceedings before the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) under Section 144C must be subsumed within the limitation period prescribed under Section 153 for the completion of assessment, meaning these timelines are not mutually exclusive.

Sultana Begum v. Prem Chand Jain
259 ITR 449 · 2003 · Supreme Court
147
citing judgments

Section 144C(4) uses a non-obstante clause to expedite the final assessment order, requiring the Assessing Officer to pass it immediately upon acceptance or lack of objection to the TPO's order, irrespective of broader time limits under Section 153.

362 ITR 539 (Gujarat) (d) Institute of Chartered Accountants of India v. DGIT
347 ITR 99 · 2012 · High Court
112
citing judgments

The broad definition of 'business' should not be applied when interpreting the proviso to Section 2(15) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as the object and purpose of the section must be considered.

American Hotel and Lodging Association Educational Institute v. CBDT
301 ITR 86 · 2008 · Supreme Court
111
citing judgments

An educational institution is eligible for exemption under Section 10(23C)(vi) if it exists solely for educational purposes, even if it generates incidental profits. The mere existence of profit does not disqualify an institution from exemption.

ACG Associated Capsule Private Limited v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central IV, Mumbai
3 SCC 321 · 2022 · Reported
89
citing judgments

Profits of a business are computed under the head 'Profits and Gains of Business or Profession' and then reduced by specific receipts mentioned in Explanation (baa) to Section 80HHC. This means that for the purposes of Section 80HHC, only profits computed under the business head are considered, with subsequent adjustments for specified receipts.

T.M.A. Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka
8 SCC 481 · 2002 · Reported
81
citing judgments

Educational institutions are not commercial activities, and collecting fees for betterment and growth does not automatically disqualify them from being considered educational. Fees collected for value-added courses, training, or hostel facilities can be eligible for exemption under Section 11 if applied towards the institution's infrastructure.

CEPT v. Shri Lakshmi Silk Mills Ltd.
20 ITR 451 · 1951 · Supreme Court
59
citing judgments

Income derived from leasing a business asset is considered business income under Section 28 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Judgments citing Section 12(4)

Swiss Re Asia Pte Ltd, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation) Circle-4(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1995/MUM/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Anish Thacker & Pranay Gandhi, A/RsFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar, CIT D/R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 9(1)(i)

ambit of fee for technical services. At the same time, in the Final Assessment Order while examining the applicability of provisions contained in section 12(4) of DTAA, the Assessing Officer has noted that in order to satisfy the requirement of 'make available' contained therein the recipient of service should

Pankaj Enterprises, Mumbai vs. Dy. / Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 41(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 4365/MUM/2025[2014-015]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Sept 2025AY 2014-015

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri S.L. JainFor Respondent: Mr. Virabhadra S. Mahajan, Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250

Supreme Court in Sultan Brothers (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT [1964] 51 ITR 353 (SC), while dealing with section 12(3) and section 12(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1922, which corresponds to section 56 of the Act, observed as follows: "It seems to us that the inseparability referred

Swiss Re Asia Pte Ltd, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT (International Taxation)-Circle -4(2)(2), Mumbai

Accordingly, Ground No. 1, 2, 3 and 5 are allowed

ITA 1492/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jan 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Percy PardiwalaFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 234BSection 270Section 9(1)(i)

technical services. At the same time, in paragraph 9.11.6 of the Final Assessment Order while examining the applicability of provisions contained in Section 12(4) of the DTAA, the Assessing Officer has noted that in order to satisfy the requirement of ‘make 26 available’ contained therein the recipient of service

Cameron(Singapore) Pte. Ltd., Tamilnadu vs. ACIT, Circle Int. Tax-1(2)(1), Delhi

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

ITA 9110/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Dec 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Hon’Ble Vice-A N D Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.9110/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2016-17 Cameron (Singapore) Pte Ltd., Acit, बनाम C/O. Cameron Manufacturing Vs. (India) Pvt. Ltd., Circle Int. Tax: 1(2)(1) Iii Floor, Tidel Park, Vilankurichi Road, Civil New Delhi. Aerodrome Post, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu – 641 014. Pan No. Aadcc5259P अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/ Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Amit Arora, C. A
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 9(1)(vii)

skill etc. enabling the recipient of service to apply them independently. That being the case, in our considered opinion, the conditions of section 12(4)(b) are not satisfied. Therefore, we hold that the receipts are not in the nature of FTS. This ground is allowed.” 6. On perusal

Bain & Company Inc., Haryana vs. DCIT, Int. Taxation, Haryana

In the result, the appeal is allowed as indicated above

ITA 567/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Presidenet & Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice-Assessment Year: 2018-19 Bain & Company, Inc. Vs. Deputy/Acit, International Tax, 131, Dartmouth Street, Gurgaon, Dartmouth Street Boston, Haryana Massachusetts, Usa, Foreign United States, C/O Bain & Company India Pvt. Ltd., 20Th Floor, Building No.10, Tower C, Dlf Cyber City, Phase-Ii, Gurgaon, India, 122 002 Pan :Aaecb9564H (Applicant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 9(1)(vii)

behalf of the clients. There is no technical skill or knowhow employed in industries research services. He, thus, submitted, the conditions of section 12(4)(b) of the Tax Treaty are not satisfied. More so, when the assessee is providing such services under cost reimbursement agreement since 2010. He submitted

Planetcast International Pte.Ltd, Singapure vs. ACIT, Circle1(1)(1) International Taxation, Delhi

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1832/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jul 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Sh. Vizaya Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 9(1)(vi)

examination is, while rendering services, whether the assessee has made available any technical knowledge, experience, skill, know- how or process in terms of section 12(4)(b). In our view, the material on record would not persuade one to conclude so. The true meaning of the aforesaid provision

Cameron (Singapore) Pte Ltd, Coimbatore vs. DCIT, International Taxation, Circle-1(2)(1), New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 7960/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Cameron (Singapore) Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Pte. Ltd., Income Tax, C/O- Schlumberger Asia International Taxation, Services Limited, Khasra Room No. 313, Ncr Building, No.2481/838, Village Bhagwan Das Road, Murtala Gala, Nh-15, Jaipur Ahmedabad Road, Barmer, Rajasthan -344001 Pan :Aadcc5259P (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 44B

services were rendered from head office in Singapore without the involvement of the project office and further the make available condition under section 12(4)(b) of India – Singapore DTAA is not satisfied, however, before us, learned counsel appearing for the assessee has made an alternative claim by pleading that ... skill etc. enabling the recipient of service to apply them independently. That being the case, in our considered opinion, the conditions of section 12(4)(b) are not satisfied. Therefore, we hold that the receipts are not in the nature of FTS. This ground is allowed. 6. In view

Shri Premkumar Menon, Chennai vs. ACIT, Ncc-17(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3070/CHNY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.3070/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2016-17 Shri Premkumar Menon, The Asst. Commissioner Of “Menon Eternity Building” Vs. Income Tax, (10Th Floor), No.165, Non Corporate Circle-17(1), St. Mary’S Road, Alwarpet, Chennai. Chennai – 600 018. [Pan: Aiapp-7309-R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05.09.2022 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.09.2022

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 24

income said to have been realised as a result of rendering the services by the assessee should have been brought to tax under section 12(4). For that contention he relied on the decision of this court in Sultan Brothers Private Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income

Air India Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO (TDS)(International Taxation), New Delhi

ITA 2262/DEL/2017[2013-14 (F.Y. 2012-13)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Apr 2021

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conference)

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Pal Puri, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Shiv Swaroop Singh, Senior DR
Section 154Section 200A

cannot be said to be an aircraft and the payment being made for rent of engine can be covered under equipment as per section 12(4) of the DTAA between India and Neitherland. It is also not in dispute that assessee has not deducted this TDS from the payment

Air India Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO (TDS)(International Taxation), New Delhi

ITA 2261/DEL/2017[2013-14 (F.Y. 2012-13)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Apr 2021

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conference)

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Pal Puri, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Shiv Swaroop Singh, Senior DR
Section 154Section 200A

cannot be said to be an aircraft and the payment being made for rent of engine can be covered under equipment as per section 12(4) of the DTAA between India and Neitherland. It is also not in dispute that assessee has not deducted this TDS from the payment

Air India Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO (TDS)(International Taxation), New Delhi

ITA 2260/DEL/2017[2013-14 (F.Y. 2012-13)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Apr 2021

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conference)

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Pal Puri, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Shiv Swaroop Singh, Senior DR
Section 154Section 200A

cannot be said to be an aircraft and the payment being made for rent of engine can be covered under equipment as per section 12(4) of the DTAA between India and Neitherland. It is also not in dispute that assessee has not deducted this TDS from the payment