← All Phrases

“liable to tax”

Chapter I - PreliminarySection 2 - DefinitionsSection 2(29A)2,645 judgments

The decision most relied on for liable to tax is DIT v. NGC Network Asia LLC (313 ITR 187), cited in 144 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on liable to tax

DIT v. NGC Network Asia LLC
313 ITR 187 · 2009 · High Court
144
citing judgments

Where a duty is cast on the payer to deduct and pay tax at source under Section 195, the payee-assessee cannot be levied interest under Section 234B for failure to pay advance tax if the payer defaults on its TDS obligation. This principle may also extend to interest under Section 234C.

CIT v. Nestle India Ltd.
14 Taxmann 99 · 1983 · High Court
125
citing judgments

Club entrance fees, if incurred wholly and exclusively for business purposes, are allowable as revenue expenditure under Section 37(1). Furthermore, an order holding a deductor liable for TDS defaults under Section 201 must be preceded by an inquiry into the deductee's actual tax payment.

CIT v. Karnataka Power Corporation
247 ITR 268 · 2001 · Supreme Court
124
citing judgments

Income earned during the project construction stage, which has a direct nexus or is inextricably linked to the project's setting up, constitutes a capital receipt not liable to tax and reduces the project cost.

CIT v. Rasoi Ltd.
335 ITR 438 · 2011 · High Court
107
citing judgments

Sales tax subsidies and Industrial Promotion Assistance received under the West Bengal Incentive Scheme are capital receipts and therefore not liable to tax. The ruling clarifies the inapplicability of the Sahney Steel judgment to such subsidies.

(supra), Rama Bai v. CIT
181 ITR 408 · 1990 · Supreme Court
84
citing judgments

Interest received on delayed payment or enhanced compensation awarded under compulsory acquisition is a revenue receipt and is liable to income tax.

Bank Vs. ACIT (2005) 142 Taxman 98 (Kerala) (v) CIT(TDS) v. Director, DPS
115 ITD 411 · ITAT
81
citing judgments

The case is an authority regarding the conditions under which an assessee can be held liable, and orders confirmed, under Section 201(1) of the Income-tax Act for failure to deduct tax at source (TDS). It clarifies the circumstances for deeming an assessee to be in default for non-deduction or non-payment of TDS.

CIT v. Chaphalkar Brothers
351 ITR 309 · 2013 · High Court
77
citing judgments

A subsidy or incentive provided by the government for meeting capital expenditure, to achieve a national objective or public interest, is a capital receipt and thus not liable to income tax. The nature of the subsidy is determined by applying the 'purpose test'.

CIT v. Wipro Ltd. (
70 Taxmann.com 129 · Reported
77
citing judgments

Payments are liable for deduction of tax at source when they are in the nature of royalty. The withholding tax liability can be worked out by applying a proportion to the total remittance.

Judgments citing liable to tax

Bhim Singh, Gurgaon vs. ITO Ward 1(3), Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 255/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Aug 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Arora, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 10(37)Section 28Section 34Section 56Section 56(2)(viii)Section 57Section 69ASection 80CSection 80D

under Section 34 of the Act is interest paid for the delayed payment of the compensation amount and, therefore, is a revenue receipt liable to tax under the Income Tax Act." 9. This position of law has been consistently reiterated by this Court in the case of T.N.K. Govindaraju Chetty

Bharat Singh Pawar, Ratlam vs. Income Tax Officer, Ratlam

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

ITA 182/IND/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore01 Aug 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Manish Boradassessment Year : 2011-12 Shri Bharat Singh Pawar, Income-Tax Officer, Gram Chorana, Ward 1, बनाम/ Post Nau Gaon, Ratlam Vs. Ratlam (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) Pan: Bnxpp4510K Assessee By Shri Gagan Tiwari, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 30.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 01.08.2024

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 2(14)Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

fall under the category of capital asset and that the income/gain if any arises from sale of the said land is not liable to tax. I, however, considering the fact that the additional evidences have been filed for the first time, therefore, the same needs to be restored

Late Chitra Chakola, Mumbai vs. ITO 24(1)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1605/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Aug 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms Kavitha Rajagopal & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2011-12 Late Chitra Chakala Ito 24(1)(4) 102, Brighton Towers, 102, Brighton Towers, Lokhandwala Complex, Vs. Lokhandwala Complex, Andheri (West), Andheri (West), Mumbai- 400053. Mumbai- 400053. Pan: Aabpc5032H (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For : Assessee By : Shri Satish Mody, A.R. Revenue By : Shri R. R. Makwana- Sr. D.R.

For Appellant: Shri Satish Mody, A.RFor Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana- SR. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

compensation received by the assessee on account of hardship caused due to the redevelopment project and is a capital receipt and hence not liable to tax. The Ld. AO, however, added the amount of Rs.25,21,508/- received as a share of compensation u/s. 143(3) r.w.s

Chandigarh Housing Board, Chandigarh vs. Pr.CIT-1, Chandigarh

In the result, the Appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 44/CHANDI/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh31 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ANDSHRI PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Jindal, CA &For Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR
Section 253Section 271(1)(c)

belief that in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances supra that how to account the interest component in books whether as income liable to tax or not liable to tax hence, we hold such reasonable belief on part of assessee as reasonable and bonafide warranting no imposition of penalty

Chandigarh Housing Board, Chandigarh vs. DCIT, C-1(1), Chandigarh

In the result, the Appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 126/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh31 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ANDSHRI PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Jindal, CA &For Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR
Section 253Section 271(1)(c)

belief that in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances supra that how to account the interest component in books whether as income liable to tax or not liable to tax hence, we hold such reasonable belief on part of assessee as reasonable and bonafide warranting no imposition of penalty

Chandigarh Housing Board, Chandigarh vs. DCIT, C-1(1), Chandigarh

In the result, the Appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 125/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh31 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ANDSHRI PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Jindal, CA &For Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR
Section 253Section 271(1)(c)

belief that in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances supra that how to account the interest component in books whether as income liable to tax or not liable to tax hence, we hold such reasonable belief on part of assessee as reasonable and bonafide warranting no imposition of penalty

DCIT, C-1(1), Chandigarh vs. Chandigarh Housing Board, Chandigarh

In the result, the Appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 103/CHANDI/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh31 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ANDSHRI PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Jindal, CA &For Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR
Section 253Section 271(1)(c)

belief that in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances supra that how to account the interest component in books whether as income liable to tax or not liable to tax hence, we hold such reasonable belief on part of assessee as reasonable and bonafide warranting no imposition of penalty

Aban Offshore Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Corp Circle 1(1), Chennai

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

ITA 556/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 556/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Aban Offshore Limited, V. Tax, 113, Janpriya Crest, Corporate Circle -1(1), Pantheon Road, Egmore, Chennai. Tamilnadu – 600 008. [Pan:Aaaca-3012-H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri. P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca (Virtual) ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri. Nanda Kumar, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05.06.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31.07.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. P. Murali Mohan Rao, CA (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri. Nanda Kumar, CIT
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 154Section 35DSection 90Section 92C

Income Tax Act the assessee is eligible to claim tax credit paid on the foreign income earned and same income is liable to tax in the resident state. In the case under consideration the income from foreign country was offered to tax by the assessee same can be evident from

Silver Wings Life Spaces, Kota vs. DCIT Circle-1 Kota, Kota

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 511/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Learned Cit(A), Which Appeal Was Filed By The Assessee

For Appellant: Sh. Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. A. S. Nehra(Addl. CIT)
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 234ASection 69

income and the case laws relied upon by the AO is not applicable and the additional income declared by the assessee is not liable to tax as per the provisions of section 115BBE of the Act. Further the reliance is also placed on the judgment

Laxmikant H Renuke, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 23(2)(1), Mumbai

ITA 2762/MUM/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Gagan Goyal

Section 143(2)Section 148Section 250

displacement of the occupants of the flat. The said payment is in the nature of hardship allowance / rehabilitation allowance and is not liable to tax. The case of the assessee is squarely supported by the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench in the case of Shri Devshi Lakhamshi Dedhia

Mahavir Metal and Alloys, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Matrumandir Nana Chowk, Mumbai

ITA 3008/MUM/2023[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2024AY 2011-2012

Bench: MS. PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Respondent: Shri Nayanjyoti Nath
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

framed on the Appellant and that in absence of scrutiny assessment it would be deemed that income liable to tax had escaped assessment. Thus, it is clear that the Assessing Officer had formed the brief that income had escaped assessment on the basis of incorrect understanding of facts. While forming

Wild West Domains, Llc, Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle-3(1)(1), Int. Tax., New Delhi

ITA 1774/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.1774/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 बनाम Wild West Domains, Llc Acit, Go Daddy India Domains & Hosting Vs. Circle-3(1)(1), Int. Services Private Limited, First Floor, Taxation, 01A167, Wework Bristol Chowk, Civic Centre, Platina Tower, Mg Road, Sector-28, Minto Road, Gurgaon, Haryana. Newdelhi. Pan No.Aabcw2372H अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 115ASection 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 234ASection 234DSection 244ASection 274Section 9

resident”. If the State in which a partnership has been organised treats that partnership as fiscally transparent, then the partnership is not “liable to tax” in that State within the meaning of Article 4, and so cannot be resident for purposes of the Convention. The Committee agreed that ... purposes of determining whether a partnership liable to tax, the real question is whether the amount of tax payable on the partnership income is determined in relation to the personal characteristics of tt partners (whether the partners are taxable or not, what other income they have, what are the personal

JCIT (OSD) Circle- 16(2), New Delhi vs. Mayar Health Resorts Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 3548/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Sudhir Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Raghav Sharma, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Anshul, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 145(2)Section 145(3)Section 209Section 35D(2)(c)

Delhi High Court upheld that the amount of fee collected relating to unexecuted services was in the nature of advance and not income liable to tax in the hands of the assessee. The aforesaid case is clearly distinguishable from the facts of file appellant, inasmuch as the fee collected

Mayar Health Resorts Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 326/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Sudhir Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Raghav Sharma, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Anshul, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 145(2)Section 145(3)Section 209Section 35D(2)(c)

Delhi High Court upheld that the amount of fee collected relating to unexecuted services was in the nature of advance and not income liable to tax in the hands of the assessee. The aforesaid case is clearly distinguishable from the facts of file appellant, inasmuch as the fee collected

Mayar Health Resorts Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 6228/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Sudhir Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Raghav Sharma, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Anshul, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 145(2)Section 145(3)Section 209Section 35D(2)(c)

Delhi High Court upheld that the amount of fee collected relating to unexecuted services was in the nature of advance and not income liable to tax in the hands of the assessee. The aforesaid case is clearly distinguishable from the facts of file appellant, inasmuch as the fee collected

Mayar Health Resorts Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 5109/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Sudhir Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Raghav Sharma, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Anshul, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 145(2)Section 145(3)Section 209Section 35D(2)(c)

Delhi High Court upheld that the amount of fee collected relating to unexecuted services was in the nature of advance and not income liable to tax in the hands of the assessee. The aforesaid case is clearly distinguishable from the facts of file appellant, inasmuch as the fee collected

Visteon Corporation, Michigan vs. DCIT, Intenl Taxn, Circle-2(2), Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 262/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:259, 260, 261 & 262/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 & S.A. Nos. 28, 29 & 30/Chny/2023 [In Ita Nos. 259, 261 & 262/Chny/2023] M/S. Visteon Corporation, The Deputy Commissioner Grace Lake Corporation Centre, Vs. Of Income Tax, Van Buren Township, International Taxation, Michigan - 48111 Circle 2(2), Chennai. Pan: Aadcv 5660K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate (By Virtual) Shri Aditya Vohra, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Bara Som, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01.07.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.07.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh: These Three Appeals By The Assessee In Ita Nos.259, 261 & 262/Chny/2023 Are Arising Out Of The Final Assessment Orders Passed By The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, International Taxation Circle 2(2), Chennai Vide Orders Of Even Date 06.01.2023 In Pursuant To The Directions Of The Dispute Resolution Panel-2

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate (By Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Nilay Bara Som, CIT
Section 142(1)Section 263

fall within ITA Nos. 259 to 262/CHNY/2023 & SA Nos.28 to 30/CHNY/2023 the definition of technical services in term of DTAA and not liable to tax. The Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka observed as under:- “14. Therefore, the clause in the Singapore agreement which explicitly makes it clear the meaning

Visteon Corporation, Michigan vs. DCIT, Intenl Taxn, Circle-2(2), Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 261/CHNY/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:259, 260, 261 & 262/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 & S.A. Nos. 28, 29 & 30/Chny/2023 [In Ita Nos. 259, 261 & 262/Chny/2023] M/S. Visteon Corporation, The Deputy Commissioner Grace Lake Corporation Centre, Vs. Of Income Tax, Van Buren Township, International Taxation, Michigan - 48111 Circle 2(2), Chennai. Pan: Aadcv 5660K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate (By Virtual) Shri Aditya Vohra, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Bara Som, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01.07.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.07.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh: These Three Appeals By The Assessee In Ita Nos.259, 261 & 262/Chny/2023 Are Arising Out Of The Final Assessment Orders Passed By The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, International Taxation Circle 2(2), Chennai Vide Orders Of Even Date 06.01.2023 In Pursuant To The Directions Of The Dispute Resolution Panel-2

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate (By Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Nilay Bara Som, CIT
Section 142(1)Section 263

fall within ITA Nos. 259 to 262/CHNY/2023 & SA Nos.28 to 30/CHNY/2023 the definition of technical services in term of DTAA and not liable to tax. The Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka observed as under:- “14. Therefore, the clause in the Singapore agreement which explicitly makes it clear the meaning

Visteon Corporation, Michigan vs. DCIT International Taxation, Circle 2(2), Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 260/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:259, 260, 261 & 262/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 & S.A. Nos. 28, 29 & 30/Chny/2023 [In Ita Nos. 259, 261 & 262/Chny/2023] M/S. Visteon Corporation, The Deputy Commissioner Grace Lake Corporation Centre, Vs. Of Income Tax, Van Buren Township, International Taxation, Michigan - 48111 Circle 2(2), Chennai. Pan: Aadcv 5660K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate (By Virtual) Shri Aditya Vohra, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Bara Som, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01.07.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.07.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh: These Three Appeals By The Assessee In Ita Nos.259, 261 & 262/Chny/2023 Are Arising Out Of The Final Assessment Orders Passed By The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, International Taxation Circle 2(2), Chennai Vide Orders Of Even Date 06.01.2023 In Pursuant To The Directions Of The Dispute Resolution Panel-2

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate (By Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Nilay Bara Som, CIT
Section 142(1)Section 263

fall within ITA Nos. 259 to 262/CHNY/2023 & SA Nos.28 to 30/CHNY/2023 the definition of technical services in term of DTAA and not liable to tax. The Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka observed as under:- “14. Therefore, the clause in the Singapore agreement which explicitly makes it clear the meaning

Visteon Corporation, Michigan vs. DCIT, Intenl Taxn, Circle-2(2), Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 259/CHNY/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:259, 260, 261 & 262/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 & S.A. Nos. 28, 29 & 30/Chny/2023 [In Ita Nos. 259, 261 & 262/Chny/2023] M/S. Visteon Corporation, The Deputy Commissioner Grace Lake Corporation Centre, Vs. Of Income Tax, Van Buren Township, International Taxation, Michigan - 48111 Circle 2(2), Chennai. Pan: Aadcv 5660K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate (By Virtual) Shri Aditya Vohra, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Bara Som, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01.07.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.07.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh: These Three Appeals By The Assessee In Ita Nos.259, 261 & 262/Chny/2023 Are Arising Out Of The Final Assessment Orders Passed By The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, International Taxation Circle 2(2), Chennai Vide Orders Of Even Date 06.01.2023 In Pursuant To The Directions Of The Dispute Resolution Panel-2

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate (By Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Nilay Bara Som, CIT
Section 142(1)Section 263

fall within ITA Nos. 259 to 262/CHNY/2023 & SA Nos.28 to 30/CHNY/2023 the definition of technical services in term of DTAA and not liable to tax. The Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka observed as under:- “14. Therefore, the clause in the Singapore agreement which explicitly makes it clear the meaning