← All Phrases

“PPT”

International TaxMLIMLI293 judgments

Judgments citing PPT

Aadi Real Estate Developers Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 510/AHD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2013-14

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NARENDRA

Malaimegam Thiyagarajan, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-10(3), Chennai

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

ITA 1448/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1448/Chny/2025 Assessment Years: 2017-18

For Appellant: Mr.H.Yeswanthkumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.R.Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 147Section 69A

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, ’सी’ न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI श्री एबी टी. वर्की, न्यायिर्क

Akhil Kutch Rabari Samaj Seva Trust, Bhuj Kutch vs. CIT (Exemption), Ahmedabad

ITA 117/RJT/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot18 Aug 2025

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Diesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. CIT DR
Section 80GSection 80G(5)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & DR. DIESH MOHAN SINHA

Tfdac Ireland II Limited, Ireland vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax International Tax Circle 4(1)(2) Mumbai, Mumbai

ITA 1198/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Aug 2025AY 2022-23
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)

learned DRP travel beyond its jurisdiction; (c) Whether Articles 6 and 7 of the Multilateral Instrument (“MLI”), embodying the Principal Purpose Test (“PPT”), apply to the facts and operate to deny treaty benefits; (d) The true characterisation and taxability of lease rentals and supplementary lease rentals; (e) Applicability of Article ... principles. 9. The AO, however, in the Draft Assessment Order dated 31 March 2024, rejected these submissions and concluded that the Principal Purpose Test (“PPT”) under Articles 6 and 7 of the MLI was not satisfied. The AO placed reliance on factors such as: firstly, the ultimate parent entity being

Dae(Sy22) Leasing (Ireland)41, Designated Activity Company, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax International Taxation Circle 2(1)(2), Mumbai

ITA 1157/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Aug 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), MS PADMAVATHY S (Accountant Member)

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

learned DRP travel beyond its jurisdiction; (c) Whether Articles 6 and 7 of the Multilateral Instrument (“MLI”), embodying the Principal Purpose Test (“PPT”), apply to the facts and operate to deny treaty benefits; (d) The true characterisation and taxability of lease rentals and supplementary lease rentals; (e) Applicability of Article ... principles. 9. The AO, however, in the Draft Assessment Order dated 31 March 2024, rejected these submissions and concluded that the Principal Purpose Test (“PPT”) under Articles 6 and 7 of the MLI was not satisfied. The AO placed reliance on factors such as: firstly, the ultimate parent entity being

Dae (Sabs) Leasing Ireland 43 Designated Activity Company, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Int Tax.Circle 2(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed and

ITA 1156/MUM/2025[2022-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Aug 2025AY 2022-22
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)

learned DRP travel beyond its jurisdiction; (c) Whether Articles 6 and 7 of the Multilateral Instrument (“MLI”), embodying the Principal Purpose Test (“PPT”), apply to the facts and operate to deny treaty benefits; (d) The true characterisation and taxability of lease rentals and supplementary lease rentals; (e) Applicability of Article ... principles. 9. The AO, however, in the Draft Assessment Order dated 31 March 2024, rejected these submissions and concluded that the Principal Purpose Test (“PPT”) under Articles 6 and 7 of the MLI was not satisfied. The AO placed reliance on factors such as: firstly, the ultimate parent entity being

Dae (Sabs) 10296 Ireland Designated Activity Company, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Int Taxation), Cirlce 2(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed and

ITA 1155/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Aug 2025AY 2022-23
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)

learned DRP travel beyond its jurisdiction; (c) Whether Articles 6 and 7 of the Multilateral Instrument (“MLI”), embodying the Principal Purpose Test (“PPT”), apply to the facts and operate to deny treaty benefits; (d) The true characterisation and taxability of lease rentals and supplementary lease rentals; (e) Applicability of Article ... principles. 9. The AO, however, in the Draft Assessment Order dated 31 March 2024, rejected these submissions and concluded that the Principal Purpose Test (“PPT”) under Articles 6 and 7 of the MLI was not satisfied. The AO placed reliance on factors such as: firstly, the ultimate parent entity being

Sky High Xliii Leasing Company Limited, Ireland vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Int Tax Circle 4 (2) (1) Mumbai, Mumbai

ITA 1122/MUM/2025[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Aug 2025AY 2022-2023
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)

learned DRP travel beyond its jurisdiction; (c) Whether Articles 6 and 7 of the Multilateral Instrument (“MLI”), embodying the Principal Purpose Test (“PPT”), apply to the facts and operate to deny treaty benefits; (d) The true characterisation and taxability of lease rentals and supplementary lease rentals; (e) Applicability of Article ... principles. 9. The AO, however, in the Draft Assessment Order dated 31 March 2024, rejected these submissions and concluded that the Principal Purpose Test (“PPT”) under Articles 6 and 7 of the MLI was not satisfied. The AO placed reliance on factors such as: firstly, the ultimate parent entity being

Ortus Aircraft Lease 5( Dublin) Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 3(2)(2) International Taxation, Mumbai

ITA 1108/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Aug 2025AY 2022-23

learned DRP travel beyond its jurisdiction; (c) Whether Articles 6 and 7 of the Multilateral Instrument (“MLI”), embodying the Principal Purpose Test (“PPT”), apply to the facts and operate to deny treaty benefits; (d) The true characterisation and taxability of lease rentals and supplementary lease rentals; (e) Applicability of Article ... principles. 9. The AO, however, in the Draft Assessment Order dated 31 March 2024, rejected these submissions and concluded that the Principal Purpose Test (“PPT”) under Articles 6 and 7 of the MLI was not satisfied. The AO placed reliance on factors such as: firstly, the ultimate parent entity being

Sunflower Aircraft Leasing Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 4(2)(2) International Tax, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1107/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Aug 2025AY 2022-23
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 9(1)(vi)

draft assessment order dated 31 March 2024, the AO denied the assessee's claim to treaty protection. He invoked the Principal Purpose Test (“PPT”) as enshrined in Articles 6 and 7 of the Multilateral Instrument ("MLI"), alleging that the assessee had failed to discharge the burden of proving that ... rate applicable to foreign companies. 7. Before the ld.DRP, the assessee lodged detailed objections, challenging the AO's invocation of the PPT, the characterisation of the leases as giving rise to royalty, and the denial of Article 8(1) relief. Upon a thorough analysis, the LD.DRP dismantled

Ortus Aircraft Lease 6(Dublin) Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 3(2)(2) International Taxation, Mumbai

ITA 1106/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Aug 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), MS PADMAVATHY S (Accountant Member)

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

learned DRP travel beyond its jurisdiction; (c) Whether Articles 6 and 7 of the Multilateral Instrument (“MLI”), embodying the Principal Purpose Test (“PPT”), apply to the facts and operate to deny treaty benefits; (d) The true characterisation and taxability of lease rentals and supplementary lease rentals; (e) Applicability of Article ... principles. 9. The AO, however, in the Draft Assessment Order dated 31 March 2024, rejected these submissions and concluded that the Principal Purpose Test (“PPT”) under Articles 6 and 7 of the MLI was not satisfied. The AO placed reliance on factors such as: firstly, the ultimate parent entity being

DCIT, Central Circle-02, New Delhi vs. Rewin Ceramics P.Ltd, New Delhi

ITA 2461/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 153ASection 153CSection 68

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

DCIT, Central Circle-02, New Delhi vs. Rewin Ceremics P.Ltd, New Delhi

ITA 2460/DEL/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 153ASection 153CSection 68

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

Civitas Sustainability Foundation, Ahmedabad vs. The CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 1169/AHD/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Jul 2025

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Smt. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1169/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : - Civitas Sustainability The Cit (Exemption) बनाम/ Foundation Ahmedabad – 380 015 V/S. B/12, Aarti Flat, Nilakiran Flat Apptt. Nr.Pulkit School, B/H. Fatehnagar, Paldi Ahmedabad – 380 007 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aahcc 9891 R (अपीलाथ)/ Appellant) (*+ यथ)/ Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Alpesh Parmar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29 /07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30 /07/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(E)’] Dated 27/03/2025, Rejecting The Application For Registration Section 80G(5) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 1169/Ahd/2025 Civitas Sustainability Foundation Vs. The Cit (E)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR
Section 80G(5)

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "ायपीठ “ए“,अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD "ी संजय गग", "ाियक सद

Rajendra Kumar Tripathi, Delhi vs. AO, Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above leaving the parties to bear their own cost(s)

ITA 3225/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 3225/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year: 2021-22 Rajendra Kumar Tripathi, Vs Cit(A)/Nfac 341, Heritage Tower, Plot No. 1, Income Tax Officer, Sector-3, Dwarka, Ward-56(3), New Delhi-110078 New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Abppt7714C Assessee By: Sh. Rajendra Kumar Tripathi Revenue By : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 23.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.07.2025 Order This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2021-22 Arises Against The Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi’S Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1074785307(1) Dated 20.03.2025, In Proceedings U/S 154 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Sh. Rajendra Kumar TripathiFor Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 154Section 246ASection 260ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member ITA No

DCIT, Central Circle-6, New Delhi, Income Tax Department vs. Late Shri Som Prakash Sethi Through Legal Heir Shri Aman Sethi, S

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3444/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganeshdcit, Vs. Shri Aman Sethi (Legal Heir Of Central Circle-6, Late Shri Som Prakash Sethi New Delhi Through Legal Heir Shri Aman Sethi, 521, Gk-2, Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Abyps3902L Assessee By : Shri Akash Ojha, Adv Revenue By: Shri Mahesh Kumar, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing 21/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 16/07/2025

For Appellant: Shri Akash Ojha, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Kumar, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT

Subhash Murarka, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Raipur

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

ITA 176/RPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur10 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.176/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2017-18 Subhash Murarka C-1/85/186-R7, Swarnabhoomi, Raipur, Chhattisgarh Pan: Aeqpm4578P .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri G.S. Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण "यायपीठ रायपुर म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR BEFORE SHRI PARTHA

Adpr & Associates, Nashik vs. ITO Ward 1(1), Nahsik

ITA 1885/PUN/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Smt. Payal R. DedhiaFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 143(1)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “ए” न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA

Adpr & Associates, Nashik vs. ITO Ward 1(1), Nashik

ITA 1884/PUN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Smt. Payal R. DedhiaFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 143(1)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “ए” न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA

Sanjay Taki, Howrah vs. DCIT, Circle 49(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 872/KOL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Jun 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 872/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Sanjay Taki,……………………….………..………Appellant 264, K. Road, Dasnagar, Belgachia, Howrah-711105, West Bengal [Pan:Afppt0288K] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,…..Respondent Circle-49(1), Kolkata, Income Tax Office, Uttarapan Complex, Ds-Iv, Kolkata-700054, West Bengal Appearances By: N O N E, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Susanta Saha, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: June 25, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: June 26, 2025 O R D E R

ITA No. 872/KOL/2025 (A.Y. 2018-2019) Sanjay Taki IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before Shri Duvvuru