“MLI”

International TaxDTAADTAA634 judgments

The decision most relied on for MLI is Sky High Appeal XLIII Leasing Company Ltd. v. ACIT (177 Taxmann.com 579), cited in 85 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on MLI

Sky High Appeal XLIII Leasing Company Ltd. v. ACIT

177 Taxmann.com 579 · ITAT

citing judgments

The Multilateral Instrument (MLI) does not become legally enforceable under domestic law without a specific notification under section 90(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for each affected Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA).

CIT v. McDowell & Co. Ltd.

180 Taxmann 514 · 2009 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

The specific words 'know-how, patents, copyrights, trade marks, licenses and franchises' constitute a distinct class of positive rights that are capable of being used or put to use, and the expression 'any other business or commercial rights of similar nature' is to be read along with the preceding categories, not as a separate category.

Judgments citing MLI

Graylines Engineers and Contractors Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officers, Ward-2(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 30/HYD/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaassessment Year: 2013-14 Gray Lines Engineers & Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward –2(2), Contractors Private Limited, Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aaccg5551B. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Darshan Jakharia, C.A. Revenue By: Ms. Kavitha Rani, Sr.A.R. Date Of Hearing: 03.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 09.12.2024

For Appellant: Shri Darshan Jakharia, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Rani, Sr.A.R

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI LALIET KUMAR

Anil Kumar Goel, Shamli vs. ITO, Ward-3(1)(4), Shamli

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 1007/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godaraassessment Year: 2018-19 Anil Kumar Goel, Vs. Income Tax Officer, S/O- Sh. Rameshvar, Ward-3(1)(4), 339-Gumbad, Shamli Kairana D, Shamli, Uttar Pradesh Pan :Arypg7951K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Department By Sh. Yogesh Sharma, Sr. Dr

Section 147Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘SMC’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year

Baba Alloys Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 4(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed”

ITA 5119/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 148

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR

Baba Alloys Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 4(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed”

ITA 5118/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Nov 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 148

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR

Ge Hydro France, Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle Int.Tax. 1(3)(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1881/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Nov 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2020-21] Ge Hydro France, Deputy Commissioner Of Income A-18, 1St Floor, Okhla Tax, Industrial, Phase-Ii, Vs Circle International Tax-1(3)(1), Tehkhand, South East Delhi, Civic Centre, Okhla Industrial Estate S.O. New Delhi-110002 New Delhi-110020 Pan-Aafca1688N Assessee Revenue Assessee By Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. & Shri Aditya Vohra, Adv. & Shri Arpit Goyal, Ca Revenue By Shri Vijay B. Vasanta, Cit-Dr & Ms.Sabiha Rizvi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 09.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 06.11.2024

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 44B

status, which has now been included in Article 13 - Artificial Avoidance of Permanent Establishment Status through the Specific Activity Exemptions of the Multilateral Instrument ("MLI"), and therefore, the arrangement of the assessee to split the otherwise single contract into various contracts with a view to avoid PE status

Ghanshyambhai Ambalal Patel, Kheda vs. The PCIT-1, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1007/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Divyakant Parikh, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Prothviraj Meena, CIT-D.R

Section 147Section 263Section 69A

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “D” BENCH Before: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member And Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountant

DCIT-CC-1(3), Nagpur vs. R.B.S.D. and F.N. Das(Export Firm), Vizianagram

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 234/NAG/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Oct 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 37(1)Section 69C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY

Jyothy Industries, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(2)(1), Bangalore

ITA 1777/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K

For Appellant: Shri. B. S. Balachandran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R Gale, Standing Counsel for Department

Section 143(3)Section 198Section 199Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "SMC - B" BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT M/s. Jyothy Industries

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Baroda vs. M/S. Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the Department’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 741/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 80Section 80I

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “D” BENCH Before: Smt. Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member And Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd., Mumbai vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Baroda

In the result, the Department’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 712/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 80Section 80I

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “D” BENCH Before: Smt. Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member And Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

ITO TDS Ward -1(2)(2) International Taxation, New Delhi vs. Bharti Airtel Limited, New Delhi

In the result, appeal is dismissed

ITA 8044/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (Vice President), SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA (Accountant Member)

Section 201Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vi)

Protocol to that Convention came to be signed on 30 December 2016 and which entered into force on 27 February 2017. The MLI Convention came to be signed by the two nations on 07 June 2017 and was ratified on 21 December 2018 and 25 June 2019 respectively. However

Bharti Airtel Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal is dismissed

ITA 7891/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (Vice President), SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA (Accountant Member)

Section 201Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vi)

Prabhati Devi, Dausa vs. ITO Ward Dausa, Dausa

ITA 1031/JPR/2024[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Jaipur01 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Sarwan Kumar Gupta, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Chaudhary, JCIT D/R

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, जयपुर न्यायपीठ, जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR श्री संदीप गोसाई, न्यायिक

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax(Exemption)-2(1), Mumbai vs. Saurashtra Trust, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals by Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3267/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms Kavitha Rajagopal & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Y.P. Trivedi, Advocate &For Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT DR

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(3)Section 13(8)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE MS KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax(Exemption)-2(1), Mumbai vs. Saurashtra Trust, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals by Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3266/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms Kavitha Rajagopal & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Y.P. Trivedi, Advocate &For Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT DR

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(3)Section 13(8)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE MS KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT

DCIT(CC)-2(3), Mumbai vs. Classic Marble Co. Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 1722/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhrespondent Classic Marble Co. Pvt. Ltd.

For Appellant: Mr. Neelkanth Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Madhu Malati Ghosh, CIT-DR

Section 131Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “C” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUNIL KUMAR

DCIT (CC)- 2(3), Mumbai vs. Classic Marble Co. Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 1720/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

Section 131Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “C” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUNIL KUMAR

DCIT (CC)-2(3), Mumbai vs. Classic Marble Co. Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1718/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

For Appellant: Mr. Neelkanth Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Madhu Malati Ghosh, CIT-DR

Section 131Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “C” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUNIL KUMAR

DCIT (CC) 2(3), Mumbai vs. Classic Marble Co. Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1717/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

For Appellant: Mr. Neelkanth Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Madhu Malati Ghosh, CIT-DR

Section 131Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “C” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUNIL KUMAR

DCIT (CC) -2(3), Mumbai vs. Classic Marble Co. Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1715/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Sept 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

For Appellant: Mr. Neelkanth Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Madhu Malati Ghosh, CIT-DR

Section 131Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “C” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUNIL KUMAR