← All Phrases

“domestic company”

Chapter I - PreliminarySection 2 - DefinitionsSection 2(22A) / ITR-6540 judgments

The decision most relied on for domestic company is CIT v. ITC Ltd. (236 Taxmann 612), cited in 108 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on domestic company

CIT v. ITC Ltd.
236 Taxmann 612 · 2016 · High Court
108
citing judgments

When computing deduction under Section 80IA, specifically for inter-unit transfer of power, the benefit cannot be claimed based on rates chargeable by distribution licensees to consumers. The deduction must be computed based on the rate fixed by the Tariff Regulation Commission for sale by electricity generating companies.

Sky High Appeal XLIII Leasing Company Ltd. v. ACIT
177 Taxmann.com 579 · ITAT
85
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).

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Gujarat Alkalies Chemicals Limited
395 ITR 247 · 2017 · High Court
49
citing judgments

Deduction under Section 80IA is allowable for captive power generation. The price for calculating this deduction is the rate at which the electricity board supplies power to its consumers, rather than the rate at which power generating companies supply to the electricity board.

Union of India v. Tata Tea Co Ltd.
398 ITR 260 · 2017 · Supreme Court
38
citing judgments

Dividend Distribution Tax (DDT) is a tax on the profits of the domestic company, not on the shareholder. The Supreme Court's decision in Tata Tea Co. Ltd. did not address the precise nature of DDT as a tax on the company versus the shareholder.

Skoda Auto India (P) Ltd. v. ACIT, Aurangabad
30 SOT 319 · 2009 · ITAT
26
citing judgments

The Tribunal may allow adjustments for differences between the tested party and comparable companies to eliminate material differences, provided accurate and credible evidence is furnished.

SwissRe Global Business Solutions India (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT
116 Taxmann.com 716 · 2020 · Reported
13
citing judgments

Working capital adjustment is an accepted adjustment provided for better comparability in transfer pricing. The Tribunal has held that working capital adjustment is necessary for better comparability.

ITO v. Strides Arcolab Ltd.
24 Taxmann.com 89 · 2012 · ITAT
13
citing judgments

Disallowance under section 14A is applicable to investments made in shares of domestic companies but not foreign companies.

Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi Bank Ltd. v. CIT
108 Taxmann.com 242 · 2019 · High Court
12
citing judgments

A non-domestic company's Permanent Establishment (PE) in India cannot be taxed at a rate higher than that applicable to a domestic company carrying out the same activities, even considering retrospective amendments to tax treaties.

Judgments citing domestic company

Tweezerman India Private Limited, Pondicherry vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Pondicherry

The appeals stands dismissed

ITA 2075/CHNY/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jan 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (1) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2057/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2007-08) & (2) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2058/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2008-09) & (3) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2059/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & (4) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2060/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & (5) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2061/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & (6) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2062/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & (7) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2063/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & (8) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2064/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & (9) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2065/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16)

For Appellant: S/Shri P. Lalith Kumar & Mehul (CAs) – Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Shri S. Sundar Rajan (JCIT) -Ld. Sr. DR
Section 115Section 237Section 250Section 90

obstante clause overriding the other provisions of the Act". The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in facts and law by stating that "the domestic company under section 115-0 does not enter the domain of DTAA" The Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the benefit granted to the Appellant ... Special Bench was as under: - Conclusion: 83. For the reasons give above, we hold that where dividend is declared, distributed or paid by a domestic company to a non-resident shareholder(s), which attracts Additional Income- tax (Tax on Distributed Profits) referred to in sec.115-O of the Act, such additional

Tweezerman India Private Limited, Pondicherry vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Pondicherry

The appeals stands dismissed

ITA 2074/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (1) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2057/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2007-08) & (2) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2058/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2008-09) & (3) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2059/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & (4) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2060/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & (5) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2061/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & (6) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2062/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & (7) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2063/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & (8) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2064/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & (9) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2065/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16)

For Appellant: S/Shri P. Lalith Kumar & Mehul (CAs) – Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Shri S. Sundar Rajan (JCIT) -Ld. Sr. DR
Section 115Section 237Section 250Section 90

obstante clause overriding the other provisions of the Act". The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in facts and law by stating that "the domestic company under section 115-0 does not enter the domain of DTAA" The Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the benefit granted to the Appellant ... Special Bench was as under: - Conclusion: 83. For the reasons give above, we hold that where dividend is declared, distributed or paid by a domestic company to a non-resident shareholder(s), which attracts Additional Income- tax (Tax on Distributed Profits) referred to in sec.115-O of the Act, such additional

Tweezerman India Private Limited, Pondicherry vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Pondicherry

The appeals stands dismissed

ITA 2068/CHNY/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (1) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2057/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2007-08) & (2) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2058/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2008-09) & (3) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2059/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & (4) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2060/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & (5) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2061/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & (6) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2062/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & (7) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2063/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & (8) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2064/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & (9) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2065/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16)

For Appellant: S/Shri P. Lalith Kumar & Mehul (CAs) – Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Shri S. Sundar Rajan (JCIT) -Ld. Sr. DR
Section 115Section 237Section 250Section 90

obstante clause overriding the other provisions of the Act". The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in facts and law by stating that "the domestic company under section 115-0 does not enter the domain of DTAA" The Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the benefit granted to the Appellant ... Special Bench was as under: - Conclusion: 83. For the reasons give above, we hold that where dividend is declared, distributed or paid by a domestic company to a non-resident shareholder(s), which attracts Additional Income- tax (Tax on Distributed Profits) referred to in sec.115-O of the Act, such additional

Tweezerman India Private Limited, Pondicherry vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Pondicherry

The appeals stands dismissed

ITA 2067/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (1) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2057/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2007-08) & (2) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2058/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2008-09) & (3) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2059/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & (4) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2060/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & (5) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2061/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & (6) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2062/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & (7) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2063/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & (8) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2064/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & (9) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2065/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16)

For Appellant: S/Shri P. Lalith Kumar & Mehul (CAs) – Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Shri S. Sundar Rajan (JCIT) -Ld. Sr. DR
Section 115Section 237Section 250Section 90

obstante clause overriding the other provisions of the Act". The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in facts and law by stating that "the domestic company under section 115-0 does not enter the domain of DTAA" The Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the benefit granted to the Appellant ... Special Bench was as under: - Conclusion: 83. For the reasons give above, we hold that where dividend is declared, distributed or paid by a domestic company to a non-resident shareholder(s), which attracts Additional Income- tax (Tax on Distributed Profits) referred to in sec.115-O of the Act, such additional

Tweezerman India Private Limited, Pondicherry vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Pondicherry

The appeals stands dismissed

ITA 2066/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (1) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2057/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2007-08) & (2) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2058/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2008-09) & (3) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2059/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & (4) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2060/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & (5) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2061/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & (6) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2062/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & (7) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2063/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & (8) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2064/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & (9) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2065/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16)

For Appellant: S/Shri P. Lalith Kumar & Mehul (CAs) – Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Shri S. Sundar Rajan (JCIT) -Ld. Sr. DR
Section 115Section 237Section 250Section 90

obstante clause overriding the other provisions of the Act". The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in facts and law by stating that "the domestic company under section 115-0 does not enter the domain of DTAA" The Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the benefit granted to the Appellant ... Special Bench was as under: - Conclusion: 83. For the reasons give above, we hold that where dividend is declared, distributed or paid by a domestic company to a non-resident shareholder(s), which attracts Additional Income- tax (Tax on Distributed Profits) referred to in sec.115-O of the Act, such additional

Tweezerman India Private Limited, Pondicherry vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Pondicherry

The appeals stands dismissed

ITA 2065/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (1) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2057/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2007-08) & (2) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2058/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2008-09) & (3) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2059/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & (4) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2060/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & (5) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2061/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & (6) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2062/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & (7) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2063/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & (8) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2064/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & (9) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2065/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16)

For Appellant: S/Shri P. Lalith Kumar & Mehul (CAs) – Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Shri S. Sundar Rajan (JCIT) -Ld. Sr. DR
Section 115Section 237Section 250Section 90

obstante clause overriding the other provisions of the Act". The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in facts and law by stating that "the domestic company under section 115-0 does not enter the domain of DTAA" The Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the benefit granted to the Appellant ... Special Bench was as under: - Conclusion: 83. For the reasons give above, we hold that where dividend is declared, distributed or paid by a domestic company to a non-resident shareholder(s), which attracts Additional Income- tax (Tax on Distributed Profits) referred to in sec.115-O of the Act, such additional

Tweezerman India Private Limited, Pondicherry vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Pondicherry

The appeals stands dismissed

ITA 2064/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (1) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2057/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2007-08) & (2) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2058/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2008-09) & (3) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2059/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & (4) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2060/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & (5) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2061/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & (6) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2062/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & (7) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2063/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & (8) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2064/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & (9) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2065/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16)

For Appellant: S/Shri P. Lalith Kumar & Mehul (CAs) – Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Shri S. Sundar Rajan (JCIT) -Ld. Sr. DR
Section 115Section 237Section 250Section 90

obstante clause overriding the other provisions of the Act". The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in facts and law by stating that "the domestic company under section 115-0 does not enter the domain of DTAA" The Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the benefit granted to the Appellant ... Special Bench was as under: - Conclusion: 83. For the reasons give above, we hold that where dividend is declared, distributed or paid by a domestic company to a non-resident shareholder(s), which attracts Additional Income- tax (Tax on Distributed Profits) referred to in sec.115-O of the Act, such additional

Tweezerman India Private Limited, Pondicherry vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Pondicherry

The appeals stands dismissed

ITA 2063/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (1) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2057/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2007-08) & (2) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2058/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2008-09) & (3) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2059/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & (4) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2060/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & (5) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2061/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & (6) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2062/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & (7) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2063/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & (8) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2064/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & (9) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2065/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16)

For Appellant: S/Shri P. Lalith Kumar & Mehul (CAs) – Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Shri S. Sundar Rajan (JCIT) -Ld. Sr. DR
Section 115Section 237Section 250Section 90

obstante clause overriding the other provisions of the Act". The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in facts and law by stating that "the domestic company under section 115-0 does not enter the domain of DTAA" The Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the benefit granted to the Appellant ... Special Bench was as under: - Conclusion: 83. For the reasons give above, we hold that where dividend is declared, distributed or paid by a domestic company to a non-resident shareholder(s), which attracts Additional Income- tax (Tax on Distributed Profits) referred to in sec.115-O of the Act, such additional

Tweezerman India Private Limited, Pondicherry vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Pondicherry

The appeals stands dismissed

ITA 2062/CHNY/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (1) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2057/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2007-08) & (2) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2058/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2008-09) & (3) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2059/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & (4) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2060/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & (5) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2061/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & (6) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2062/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & (7) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2063/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & (8) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2064/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & (9) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2065/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16)

For Appellant: S/Shri P. Lalith Kumar & Mehul (CAs) – Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Shri S. Sundar Rajan (JCIT) -Ld. Sr. DR
Section 115Section 237Section 250Section 90

obstante clause overriding the other provisions of the Act". The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in facts and law by stating that "the domestic company under section 115-0 does not enter the domain of DTAA" The Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the benefit granted to the Appellant ... Special Bench was as under: - Conclusion: 83. For the reasons give above, we hold that where dividend is declared, distributed or paid by a domestic company to a non-resident shareholder(s), which attracts Additional Income- tax (Tax on Distributed Profits) referred to in sec.115-O of the Act, such additional

Tweezerman India Private Limited, Pondicherry vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Pondicherry

The appeals stands dismissed

ITA 2061/CHNY/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (1) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2057/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2007-08) & (2) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2058/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2008-09) & (3) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2059/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & (4) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2060/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & (5) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2061/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & (6) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2062/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & (7) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2063/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & (8) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2064/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & (9) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2065/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16)

For Appellant: S/Shri P. Lalith Kumar & Mehul (CAs) – Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Shri S. Sundar Rajan (JCIT) -Ld. Sr. DR
Section 115Section 237Section 250Section 90

obstante clause overriding the other provisions of the Act". The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in facts and law by stating that "the domestic company under section 115-0 does not enter the domain of DTAA" The Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the benefit granted to the Appellant ... Special Bench was as under: - Conclusion: 83. For the reasons give above, we hold that where dividend is declared, distributed or paid by a domestic company to a non-resident shareholder(s), which attracts Additional Income- tax (Tax on Distributed Profits) referred to in sec.115-O of the Act, such additional

Tweezerman India Private Limited, Pondicherry vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Pondicherry

The appeals stands dismissed

ITA 2060/CHNY/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jan 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (1) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2057/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2007-08) & (2) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2058/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2008-09) & (3) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2059/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & (4) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2060/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & (5) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2061/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & (6) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2062/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & (7) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2063/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & (8) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2064/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & (9) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2065/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16)

For Appellant: S/Shri P. Lalith Kumar & Mehul (CAs) – Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Shri S. Sundar Rajan (JCIT) -Ld. Sr. DR
Section 115Section 237Section 250Section 90

obstante clause overriding the other provisions of the Act". The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in facts and law by stating that "the domestic company under section 115-0 does not enter the domain of DTAA" The Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the benefit granted to the Appellant ... Special Bench was as under: - Conclusion: 83. For the reasons give above, we hold that where dividend is declared, distributed or paid by a domestic company to a non-resident shareholder(s), which attracts Additional Income- tax (Tax on Distributed Profits) referred to in sec.115-O of the Act, such additional

Tweezerman India Private Limited, Pondicherry vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Pondicherry

The appeals stands dismissed

ITA 2059/CHNY/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jan 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (1) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2057/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2007-08) & (2) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2058/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2008-09) & (3) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2059/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & (4) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2060/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & (5) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2061/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & (6) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2062/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & (7) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2063/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & (8) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2064/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & (9) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2065/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16)

For Appellant: S/Shri P. Lalith Kumar & Mehul (CAs) – Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Shri S. Sundar Rajan (JCIT) -Ld. Sr. DR
Section 115Section 237Section 250Section 90

obstante clause overriding the other provisions of the Act". The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in facts and law by stating that "the domestic company under section 115-0 does not enter the domain of DTAA" The Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the benefit granted to the Appellant ... Special Bench was as under: - Conclusion: 83. For the reasons give above, we hold that where dividend is declared, distributed or paid by a domestic company to a non-resident shareholder(s), which attracts Additional Income- tax (Tax on Distributed Profits) referred to in sec.115-O of the Act, such additional

Tweezerman India Private Limited, Pondicherry vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Pondicherry

The appeals stands dismissed

ITA 2058/CHNY/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jan 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (1) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2057/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2007-08) & (2) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2058/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2008-09) & (3) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2059/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & (4) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2060/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & (5) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2061/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & (6) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2062/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & (7) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2063/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & (8) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2064/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & (9) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2065/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16)

For Appellant: S/Shri P. Lalith Kumar & Mehul (CAs) – Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Shri S. Sundar Rajan (JCIT) -Ld. Sr. DR
Section 115Section 237Section 250Section 90

obstante clause overriding the other provisions of the Act". The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in facts and law by stating that "the domestic company under section 115-0 does not enter the domain of DTAA" The Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the benefit granted to the Appellant ... Special Bench was as under: - Conclusion: 83. For the reasons give above, we hold that where dividend is declared, distributed or paid by a domestic company to a non-resident shareholder(s), which attracts Additional Income- tax (Tax on Distributed Profits) referred to in sec.115-O of the Act, such additional

Tweezerman India Private Limited, Pondicherry vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Pondicherry

The appeals stands dismissed

ITA 2057/CHNY/2024[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jan 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (1) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2057/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2007-08) & (2) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2058/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2008-09) & (3) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2059/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & (4) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2060/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & (5) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2061/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & (6) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2062/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & (7) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2063/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & (8) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2064/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & (9) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2065/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16)

For Appellant: S/Shri P. Lalith Kumar & Mehul (CAs) – Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Shri S. Sundar Rajan (JCIT) -Ld. Sr. DR
Section 115Section 237Section 250Section 90

obstante clause overriding the other provisions of the Act". The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in facts and law by stating that "the domestic company under section 115-0 does not enter the domain of DTAA" The Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the benefit granted to the Appellant ... Special Bench was as under: - Conclusion: 83. For the reasons give above, we hold that where dividend is declared, distributed or paid by a domestic company to a non-resident shareholder(s), which attracts Additional Income- tax (Tax on Distributed Profits) referred to in sec.115-O of the Act, such additional

M/S. Piaggio Vehicles Pvt.Ltd, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 4, Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 868/PUN/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.868/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Piaggio Vehicles Private Ltd., V The Assistant Sky One Corporate Park, S Commissioner Of Income Ground Floor, Survey Tax, Circle-4, Pune. No.239/02, Near Pune Airport, Pune – 411032. Pan: Aabcp1225G Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Siddhesh Chaugule – Ar Revenue By Shri Vidya Ratan - Dr Date Of Hearing 18/12/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 23/12/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-13, Pune For Assessment Year 2015-16 Dated 06.10.2022 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. Refund Of Excess Taxes Paid On Dividend Distributed On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Hon'Ble Cit(A) Has Erred In Not Granting The Benefit Of Article 11 Of The India-

Section 115Section 2(24)Section 250Section 3Section 4

noted that the key issue was whether section 115-0 of the Act, which imposes additional tax on dividends paid by a domestic company, was within the fold of Entry 82 of the Constitution, which embraces the entire field of "tax on income" d. Referring to section ... Hence, it would not be appropriate to ignore the 'dividend income part and merely conclude that DDT is a "tax on profits of the domestic company The aforesaid observation is contrary to the principle laid down by the Hon'ble SC in Tata Tea decision, wherein it is clearly laid

L'Oreal India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Department, Mumbai

ITA 4577/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Dec 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankarl'Oreal India Private V/S. Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, A-Wing, 8Th Floor, Marathon Futurex, N.M. Joshi Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai Maharashtra 400 013, बनाम Income Tax- 7(1)(1), Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai 400020, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaacl0738K Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी Appellant By : Shri Niraj Sheth Respondent By : Ms. Neena Jeph (Cit Dr) Date Of Hearing 19.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 16.12.2024 आदेश / Order Per Prabhash Shankar [Α.Μ.] This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Challenging The Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer/Transfer Pricing Officer (‘Tpo' For Short) Pursuant To The Direction Of The Hon'Ble Dispute Resolution Panel ('Drp' For Short), Passed U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) R.W.S. 144B Of The Act Relevant To The Assessment Year (A.Y. For Short) 2020-21.The Assessee Has Challenged The Grounds Of Transfer Pricing Adjustment On Account Of Advertisement, Marketing & Promotion (Amp) Expenses. Following Are The Grounds Raised By The Assessee: Page 2

For Appellant: Shri Niraj ShethFor Respondent: Ms. Neena Jeph (CIT DR)
Section 143(3)Section 4Section 92Section 92BSection 92C

Page 1 ITA No. 4577/MUM/2024 (A.Y. 2020-21) IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP