← All Phrases

“non-resident”

Chapter I - PreliminarySection 2 - DefinitionsSection 2(30) / Section 6 / ITR Forms3,736 judgments

The decision most relied on for non-resident is GE India Technology Centre Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (327 ITR 456), cited in 663 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on non-resident

GE India Technology Centre Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT
327 ITR 456 · 2010 · Supreme Court
663
citing judgments

Tax must be deducted at source from payments made to a non-resident under Section 195 only if such payment is chargeable to tax in India. The Assessing Officer bears the onus to establish that the payments made are indeed chargeable to tax under the Income Tax Act.

CIT v. Samsung Electronics Ltd.
345 ITR 494 · 2012 · High Court
461
citing judgments

Payments by Indian residents to non-resident foreign software suppliers for software are considered royalty, constituting income deemed to accrue in India under section 9(1)(v), thereby requiring tax deduction at source under section 195.

Ishikawajima Harima Heavy Industries Ltd. v. DIT
288 ITR 408 · 2007 · Supreme Court
394
citing judgments

Income from offshore supply of goods and services is not taxable in India if the entire transaction, including transfer of ownership and payments, occurs outside India.

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.

CIT v. Toshoku Ltd.
125 ITR 525 · 1980 · Supreme Court
270
citing judgments

A non-resident commission agent is not chargeable to tax in India on commission income if no business operations are carried out in India. Consequently, no TDS is required under Section 195 on such payments.

DIT v. Infrasoft Ltd.
39 Taxmann.com 88 · 2013 · High Court
269
citing judgments

Payments for the use of copyrighted software, without the transfer of any rights in the underlying copyright itself, do not constitute 'royalty' under the Income-tax Act or tax treaties. Such payments are often treated as business income, taxable only if a permanent establishment exists.

Transmission Corporation of Andhra Pradesh v. CIT
239 ITR 587 · 1999 · Supreme Court
243
citing judgments

The Supreme Court lays down principles for deducting tax at source (TDS) under Section 195 on payments to non-residents, including aspects of income deemed taxable in India and the application of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements (DTAAs) under Section 90.

ONGC v. CIT
376 ITR 306 · 2015 · Supreme Court
241
citing judgments

Income derived by a non-resident for services related to mineral oil operations, falling under the presumptive taxation regime of Section 44BB, cannot simultaneously be treated as fees for technical services under Section 9(1)(vii). The specific presumptive provisions override the general FTS definition, particularly when DTAA applies.

Judgments citing non-resident

Air France, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1(1)(1), Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 5205/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 250

required. 5. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. The assessee is a branch office of a non-resident corporate entity incorporated in France and is a tax resident of France. Its head office is situated in Paris, France. The assessee is engaged ... Ground nos. 2 to 15 4. Briefly the facts relating to this issue are, the assessee, a branch office of a non-resident corporate entity is incorporated in France and a tax resident of France. Its head office is situated in Paris, France. The assessee is engaged in the business

Best Bull Stock Trading Pvt Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-18, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 2954/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. C.N. Prasad & Sh. M. Balaganesh

Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 150Section 150(1)Section 150(2)Section 153(6)Section 153A

then stood, a notice of assessment or reassessment could not be issued against a person deemed to be an agent of a non-resident under section 43, after the expiry of one year from the end of the year of assessment. The section was amended by section ... respect of the assessment year 1954-55, the assessee should not be treated as an agent under section 43 in respect of certain non-residents. The case of the assessee, inter alia, was that the proposed action was barred by limitation as right to commence proceedings of assessment against

Best Bull Stock Trading Pvt Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-18, Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 2953/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. C.N. Prasad & Sh. M. Balaganesh

Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 150Section 150(1)Section 150(2)Section 153(6)Section 153A

then stood, a notice of assessment or reassessment could not be issued against a person deemed to be an agent of a non-resident under section 43, after the expiry of one year from the end of the year of assessment. The section was amended by section ... respect of the assessment year 1954-55, the assessee should not be treated as an agent under section 43 in respect of certain non-residents. The case of the assessee, inter alia, was that the proposed action was barred by limitation as right to commence proceedings of assessment against

Linkedin Technology Information Private Limited, Delhi vs. Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax, Delhi -4, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2492/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Sriram Seshadri, CAFor Respondent: Shri Nethrapal, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 195Section 263Section 40

India-USA DTAA, is dependent on the fact whether the conditions for disallowing an expense are applied similarly to both residents and non-residents and the judicial interpretation which holds that where the provisions of Income Tax Act are found to be discriminatory, it is the DTAA provision Page ... would prevail over the Income Tax Act. Historically, the original provisions of section 40(a)(i) provided for 100% disallowance of payment made to non-resident, without making TDS whereas no such disallowance was contemplated for payments made to a resident without TDS. The amendment vide Finance Act 2004, consequence

Kalpesh Ravjibhai Sojitra, Jasdan vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1)(2), Rajkot

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed, in above terms

ITA 487/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot08 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha(Hybrid Hearing) Kalpesh Ravjibhai Sojitra, Vs. The Ito, Prop. Sojitra Petrolium, Bypass Ward-2(1)(2), Circle Atkot Road, Jasdan, Rajkot 360050, Rajkot-( Guj) "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Bqmps8120G (/Appellant) (/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Brijesh Parekh, Ld ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 68

notice of assessment or re-assessment under section 34(1) of 1922 Act against a person deemed to be an agent of a non-resident person under section 43 of 1922 Act could not be issued after the expiry of one year from the end of the year of assessment ... question then was, whether the ITO might issue a notice of assessment to a person as an agent of a non-resident party under the amended provision when the period prescribed for such a notice had before the amended Act came into force expired ? Indisputably the period for serving

Surya International Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow vs. Central Processing Centre, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 323/LKW/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow08 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 143(1)Section 2(8)Section 40A(3)

Amount in Rs. Remarks if any I.T.A. No.323/Lkw/2025 Assessment Year:2020-21 8 b) Amounts inadmissible under section 40(a) i As payment to non-resident referred to in sub-clause (i) A Details of payment on which tax is not deducted NIL Date of Amount Nature Name PAN Address

Balguri Rajeshwar Rao, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward- 11(1), Hyderabad

ITA 1728/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.1728/Hyd/2025

For Appellant: T Chaitanya Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Helen Ruby Jesindha, Sr. AR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 69A

LAXMI NILAYAM, SAI NAGAR ALLWYN COLONY KUKATPALLY HYDERABAD 500072, Andhra Pradesh India Email of the assessee kumar.company521@gmail.com Resident/ Not Ordinarily Resident/ Non-Resident Resident DATED: 27/03/2023 Name and Designation of Specified Authority Specified Authority approval date ATUL PRANAY PCCIT, AP & TELANGANA 26/03/2023 Order under clause (d) of section 148A

Primary Agricultural Co Op Credit Society Limited Minarpally, Minarpally Village vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Nizamabad

ITA 140/HYD/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2026AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice- & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.140/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2016-17) Primary Agricultural Vs. Income Tax Officer Cooperative Credit Society Ward 1 Ltd Minarpally, Minarpally Minarpally, Nizamabad Pan:Aabap7760J (Respondent) (Appellant) निर्धारिती द्वारा / Assessee By: C.A Akshay Surana राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue By:: Smt. Helen Ruby Jesindha, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 22/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Pronouncement: 07/01/2026 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society Ltd Minarpally (“The Assessee"), Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 05.11.2024 For The A.Y, 2016-17. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: Page 1 Of 18

For Appellant: C.A Akshay Surana
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 80P

assessee PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CO OP CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED MINARPALLY MINARPALLY VILLAGE, BODHAN MANDAL NIZAMABAD 503185, Andhra Pradesh India kandikatlahanmandlu@gmail.com Resident/ Not Ordinarily Resident/ Non-Resident Date of order Resident 22/03/2023 Name and Designation of Specified Authority Specified Authority approval date ATUL PRANAY PCCIT, AP & TELANGANA 22/03/2023 Order under clause

The Uk Trade Desk Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT (Int.Tax)-4(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, various sub grounds of ground no

ITA 2038/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jan 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal(Physical Hearing) The Uk Trade Desk Ltd. Acit (International Taxation-4(3)(1), 10Th Floor, 1 Bartholomew Close, Vs Mumbai, 6Th Floor, Kautilya Bhavan, Bkc, London, United Kingdom. [Pan No. Aahct6320Q] Bandra East, Mumbai – 400051. Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 153Section 254(1)Section 9(1)(i)

provides to Indian customer. The assessee appointed its subsidiary in India to provide marketing and related services to assessee. The assessee is a non-resident and maintained its financial statement in its source country that is UK. The financial statements were provided to lower authorities. The assessee entered into

The Hisar Leading Bank Co-Op Non-Agri Thrift & Credit Society, Hisar vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-1, Hisar

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 5053/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 68

person on whom a notice under section 148 is to be served is a person treated as the agent of a non-resident under section 163 and the assessment, reassessment or recomputation to be made in pursuance of the notice is to be made on him as the agent ... such non-resident, the notice shall not be issued after the expiry of a period of six years from the end of the relevant assessment year. Explanation.-- For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that the provisions of sub-sections (1) and (3), as amended by the Finance

Intertek India Private Limited, New Delhi vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 10(1), Delhi, New Delhi

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

ITA 2904/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 143

heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. The short issue in dispute is assessee company had paid dividend to its non-resident shareholder. The assessee company had suffered dividend distribution tax at the rate of 20.36 percent in terms of section 115O ... dividends paid to non-resident shareholder, the assessee wanted to claim the benefit of reduced rate of tax of 10 percent as provided in Article 11 of India UK DTAA on the pretext that treaty provisions would override the domestic law. Accordingly, the plea of the assessee was that dividend

Intertek India Private Limited, New Delhi vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 10(1), Delhi, New Delhi

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

ITA 2903/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 143

heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. The short issue in dispute is assessee company had paid dividend to its non-resident shareholder. The assessee company had suffered dividend distribution tax at the rate of 20.36 percent in terms of section 115O ... dividends paid to non-resident shareholder, the assessee wanted to claim the benefit of reduced rate of tax of 10 percent as provided in Article 11 of India UK DTAA on the pretext that treaty provisions would override the domestic law. Accordingly, the plea of the assessee was that dividend

Saic Motor Corporation Ltd, China vs. DCIT, International Tax, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1191/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Vimal Kumar & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2022-23] Saic Motor Corporation Assistant Commissioner Of Income Limited, Tax, International Taxation, Gurgaon, Room No.509, Building No.1, Vs Hsiidc Building, Vanijya Nikunj, Tower No.563, Songtao Road, Udyog Vihar, Phase-V, Gurgaon, Pilot Free Trade Zone, Sanghai, Haryana-122001 China, Pan-Abfcs0870H Assessee Revenue Assessee By Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Shri Kunal Pandey, Adv. Revenue By Shri Rohit Garg, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 10.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 07.01.2026 Order

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 153(1)

stability, productivity and dependence (Para 76); (d) the place of business of an agent who carries out a sales function on behalf of the non-resident principal can be treated as the fixed place PE of the non-resident (citing with approval - In Universal Furniture Ind. AB v. Government

Income Tax Officer, Civic Centre, New Delhi vs. Naveen Arora, Lajpat Nagar, Delhi

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 3251/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amitabh Shukla

Section 144Section 172Section 195Section 69ASection 69C

dated 05.02.2016, the High Court of Bombay categorically found that there is no need to recover tax at source u/s.195 for cases of non-residents whose income is covered u/s. 172. The said decision has been followed in other Tribunals too including ITAT Amritsar Bench in the reported decision

Bombardier Transportation Gmmh, New Delhi vs. Addldirecoootor of Inomce-Tax (International Taxation), Range-1, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4547/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandraआअसं.5732/धिल्ली/2011(नि.व. 2008-09) Bombardier Transportation Gmbh, C/O M/S. Bombardier Transportation India Ltd., 3Rd Floor, B-Wing, Somdutt Chambers-I, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Pan: Aadcb-4031-C बिाम Vs. Assistant Director Of Income Tax, ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Circle 1(1), New Delhi आअसं.4547/धिल्ली/2017(नि.व. 2009-10) Bombardier Transportation Gmbh, C/O M/S. Bombardier Transportation India P. Ltd., Asset No. 2, 3Rd Floor, Novotel- Pullman Commercial Tower, Aero City, Delhi International Airport, New Delhi 110037 ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Pan: Aadcb-4031-C बिाम Vs. Assistant Director Of Income Tax, ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Circle 1(1), New Delhi आअसं.4511/धिल्ली/2017(नि.व. 2009-10) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, (International Taxation), R. No. 409, E-2 Block, 4Th Floor, Civic Centre, Near Minto Road, ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant New Delhi बिाम Vs. Bombardier Transportation Gmbh, C/Co Asa & Associates, K S House 118, Shahpur Jat, New Delhi 110049 ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Pan: Aadcb-4031-C

For Appellant: S/Shri Deepak Chopra, Anmol Anand &For Respondent: Ms. Ekta Jain CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)

charging of interest u/s.234B of the Act, the ld. Counsel submits that the provisions of section 234B of the Act does not apply to non-resident in the impugned assessment year. Hence, no interest under said section is leviable on the assessee. In support of his submissions, he placed reliance ... after AY 2012-13. Hence, for the assessment year under appeal i.e. AY 2008-09 no interest shall be chargeable from the assessee, a non-resident u/s.234B of the Act. Thus, the assessee succeeds on ground no. 4 of appeal as well. 24. The assessee by way of application

DCIT, Circle- 1(1)(2), Intl. Taxation, New Delhi vs. Bombardier Transportation Gmbh, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4511/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandraआअसं.5732/धिल्ली/2011(नि.व. 2008-09) Bombardier Transportation Gmbh, C/O M/S. Bombardier Transportation India Ltd., 3Rd Floor, B-Wing, Somdutt Chambers-I, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Pan: Aadcb-4031-C बिाम Vs. Assistant Director Of Income Tax, ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Circle 1(1), New Delhi आअसं.4547/धिल्ली/2017(नि.व. 2009-10) Bombardier Transportation Gmbh, C/O M/S. Bombardier Transportation India P. Ltd., Asset No. 2, 3Rd Floor, Novotel- Pullman Commercial Tower, Aero City, Delhi International Airport, New Delhi 110037 ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Pan: Aadcb-4031-C बिाम Vs. Assistant Director Of Income Tax, ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Circle 1(1), New Delhi आअसं.4511/धिल्ली/2017(नि.व. 2009-10) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, (International Taxation), R. No. 409, E-2 Block, 4Th Floor, Civic Centre, Near Minto Road, ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant New Delhi बिाम Vs. Bombardier Transportation Gmbh, C/Co Asa & Associates, K S House 118, Shahpur Jat, New Delhi 110049 ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Pan: Aadcb-4031-C

For Appellant: S/Shri Deepak Chopra, Anmol Anand &For Respondent: Ms. Ekta Jain CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)

charging of interest u/s.234B of the Act, the ld. Counsel submits that the provisions of section 234B of the Act does not apply to non-resident in the impugned assessment year. Hence, no interest under said section is leviable on the assessee. In support of his submissions, he placed reliance ... after AY 2012-13. Hence, for the assessment year under appeal i.e. AY 2008-09 no interest shall be chargeable from the assessee, a non-resident u/s.234B of the Act. Thus, the assessee succeeds on ground no. 4 of appeal as well. 24. The assessee by way of application

Bombardier Transportation Gmbh, New Delhi vs. ADIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 5732/DEL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2026AY 2008-09
Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)

charging of interest u/s.234B of the Act, the Id. Counsel submits that the provisions of section 234B of the Act does not apply to non-resident in the impugned assessment year. Hence, no interest under said section is leviable on the assessee. In support of his submissions, he placed reliance ... after AY 2012-13. Hence, for the assessment year under appeal i.e. AY 2008-09 no interest shall be chargeable from the assessee, a non-resident u/s.234B of the Act. Thus, the assessee succeeds on ground no. 4 of appeal as well. 24. The assessee by way of application

Aparna Girish Hebbani, Australia vs. Int Tax Ward 2(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5061/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2019-20 Aparna Girish Hebbani Income Tax Officer, 21, Hallow Crescent, Ward – 2(2)(1), Augustine Heights, Queensland, Vs. Mumbai Australia (Pan : Ahhph4844H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Harshavardhan V. Bapat & Shri Raj Mehta, Cas Revenue : Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 15.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.01.2026 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal Filed By Assessee Is Against The Order Of Cit (A) 56, Mumbai Vide Itba/Apl/S/250/2023-24/1061197750(1), Dated 20.02.2024 Passed Against The Assessment Order By Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax – Centralized Processing Centre (Cpc), Bengaluru, U/S. 154 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 15.01.2022 For Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. Grounds Taken By Assessee Are Reproduced As Under:

For Appellant: Shri Harshavardhan V. Bapat and Shri Raj Mehta, CAsFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 90

ought to have appreciated the bona fide reasons for the delay in filing Form 67, including technical difficulties faced by the Appellant, being a Non-Resident Indian residing outside India with limited access to OTP- based verification systems. 7. That the order passed under Section 250 upholding the denial ... which was not granted due to delay in the filing of Form – 67. 3. Brief facts of the case are that assessee is a non-resident Indian (NRI) and is engaged in teaching in Australia. Return of income was filed on 31.08,2019 reporting total income at Rs.46

Nayna Mukeshkumar Kotecha, Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania vs. ACIT, International Taxation, Rajkot

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

ITA 187/RJT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot05 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Sumit Shingala, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. CIT(DR)
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69A

Jurisdictional Objection: The appellant has contended that Id. ITO, Ward 1(1)(1), Rajkot did not have jurisdiction to issue notice u/s. 148A/148 to non-resident. It is clarified that the objection is not concerning mere territorial jurisdiction, it is substantially about residential status of the appellant. 2. Department ... Contention: The Department contends that the appellant failed to inform the AO about her non-resident status. This is both factually and legally flawed. 3. Department's Knowledge of Non-Resident Status: i. The show-cause notice u/s 148A refers to 'receipt of remittance by a non- resident

Kloeckner Desma Machinery Pvt Ltd, Ahmedabad vs. Dy. CIT, Circle 2(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 578/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member), Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vivek Chavda, ARFor Respondent: Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, CIT.DR
Section 195Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(i)

failed to appreciate that as per Section 9(1)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the established judicial principles, commission payments to non-resident agents for services rendered entirely outside India cannot be deemed to accrue or arise in India, and therefore, the appellant was not required ... they would be exempt from tax under the respective Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements (DTAAS) between India and the countries in which the non-resident agents are based. ITA No. 578/Ahd/2025 [Kloeckner Desma Machinery Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT] A.Y. 2017-18 - 3 – 3.1 The Ld. CIT(A) has grievously erred