“non-resident”

ITO (International Taxation) 2(3) (1), Mumbai vs. Shri Rajeev Suresh Gehi, Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Us Is Delayed By 14 Days. In The Present Appeal, The Impugned Order Dated 11-02-2022 Was Received By The Revenue On The Same Date. Thus, As Per The Provisions Of Section 253(3) Of The Act, The Revenue Was Required The Filed The Appeal Within 60 Days From The Received The Order. However, The Revenue Filed Appeal, For The Year Under 2 Shri Rajeev Suresh Gehi

Revenue, in the present appeal, is against the deletion of addition on account of investment made in India by the assessee, who is non-resident Indian settled in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) 5. The brief facts of the case, as emanating from the record, are: The assessee

M/S. Macrotech Developers Ltd (Sucessor to Palava Dwellers Pvt. Ltd), Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, International Taxation 3(2) (2), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

assessment M/s. Macrotech Developers Ltd. (Successor to Palava Dwellers Pvt. Ltd.) ITA No.1813/Mum./2022 proceedings, it was observed that the assessee had appointed non-resident vendor in Singapore for providing consultancy services for its real estate development projects. The assessee made foreign remittances to such non- resident/foreign vendors in respect ... appeal before us. 5. During the course of hearing, learned Authorised Representative (‘learned AR’) submitted that assessee had made remittance both to resident and non-resident vendors, during the year under consideration. In respect of transaction with resident vendor, wherein assessee was deemed to be an assessee in default

B Braun Medical (India ) Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT -1(2) (1), Mumbai

arises as a consequence of the order of the Transfer Pricing Officer passed under sub-section (3) of section 92CA; and (ii) any non-resident not being a company, or any foreign company." 7. The conditions of the said provision does not hold good in assessee’s case wherein

Dy CIT (International Taxation), Mumbai vs. Swiss Finance Corporation (Mauritius) Ltd., Mauritius

treatment (treated as exempt) & should not be allowed to be carried forward”. 4. Brief facts of the case are that the Assessee is a non-resident Foreign Institutional Investor (FII) registered as a company in Assessment Year 2015-16 & 2017-18 Mauritius. The Assessee filed its original return of income

Shradha Estate Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 5(3) (2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shrikuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalshradha Estate Pvt. Ltd., 3, New Bake Bihari Building, 24Th Road, Khar (West), Opp. Khar Tel Ex, Mumbai-40052. Pan: Aabcs4961J ...... Appellant Vs. Ito-5(3)(2), Room No. 583, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. ..... Respondent Appellant By : None Respondent By : Sh. Ashish Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 05/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 03/10/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M:

that he is residing at Dubai and has been out of India for past couple of years and his status is that of a non-resident. vi) The assessee company purchased those shares which were originally sold before 2-3 years offline. vii) We have gone through the charts

Mwh India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 9(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in the terms aforesaid

Bench: Vikas Awasthy & Shri Prashant Maharishiआअसं. 1891/मुं/2014 ("न. व. 2009-10 ) Mwh India Pvt. Ltd. 168, Udyog Bhavan, Sonawala Road, Goregaon(E) Mumbai 400 063. Pan: Aaaca-4613-L ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. The Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle – 9(2), Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai 400 020 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Shri Jehangir D.Mistri With Shri Ketan Ved & Shri Niraj Sheth ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Ms. Vatsalaa Jha सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 08/07/2022 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 03/10/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Assessment Order Dated 31/01/2014 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C (13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [In Short ‘The Act’]

further erred in holding that the transaction of slump sale between two AEs was controlled by foreign holding company i.e. a non-resident AE, hence, it is an international transaction. The ld.Counsel for the assessee asserted that the provisions of section 92B are attracted only where there is transaction between ... companies and at least one of them is a non-resident. The conditions of section 92B are not satisfied hence, the transaction of slump sale does not fall within the ambit of international transaction. In support of his submission the ld.Counsel for the assessee placed reliance on the decisions rendered

American Chemical Society, Gurgaon vs. The Asstt. CIT (International Taxation)-1(3)(2), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

Bombay High Court in the case of DIT vs. Dun and Bradstreet information Services Indio (P) Ltd. (supra). In this case, the applicant, a non-resident company of Spain was engaged in the business of compilation and selling Business Information Reports (BIR) in their local markets and to other associate ... Reports in electronic form to a sale of book, which does not involve any transfer of intellectual property and held that the payment to non-resident company for downloading BIRS is not in the nature of Royalty or fee for technical services. The AAR held that the purchase of standardized

American Chemical Society, Gurgaon vs. The Asstt. CIT (International Taxation)-1(3)(2), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

Bombay High Court in the case of DIT vs. Dun and Bradstreet information Services Indio (P) Ltd. (supra). In this case, the applicant, a non-resident company of Spain was engaged in the business of compilation and selling Business Information Reports (BIR) in their local markets and to other associate ... Reports in electronic form to a sale of book, which does not involve any transfer of intellectual property and held that the payment to non-resident company for downloading BIRS is not in the nature of Royalty or fee for technical services. The AAR held that the purchase of standardized

ACIT Circle-16 (1), Mumbai vs. Shri. Sunil Hingorani, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

same as unexplained cash credit u/s.68 of the Act. The assessee before the ld. CIT(A) explained that his brother is a non-resident and entire details called for by the ld. AO could not be furnished at the time of assessment proceedings due to paucity of time. Accordingly