“non-resident”

Jas Forwarding Worldwide Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2011 – 12 is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

Section 40{a)(i) - Rs. 24,68,35,593 5. The Ld. AO failed to appreciate that the payments made by the Assessee to non-resident Associated Enterprises were towards rendering freight and forwarding services, which was a business income in the hands of the respective ... failed to appreciate that the tax has not been deducted on the payments made by the Assessee to agents of non-resident shipping companies based on declaration received from such companies. Therefore, the Assessee was not under any obligation to withhold any tax from the payments so made.” 5. Brief

Jas Forwarding Worldwide Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2011 – 12 is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

Section 40{a)(i) - Rs. 24,68,35,593 5. The Ld. AO failed to appreciate that the payments made by the Assessee to non-resident Associated Enterprises were towards rendering freight and forwarding services, which was a business income in the hands of the respective ... failed to appreciate that the tax has not been deducted on the payments made by the Assessee to agents of non-resident shipping companies based on declaration received from such companies. Therefore, the Assessee was not under any obligation to withhold any tax from the payments so made.” 5. Brief

M/S. Mccann Erickson (India) Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Dr.B.R.R.Kumarassessment Year : 2008-09 Mccann Erickson (India) Pvt.Ltd., Vs Acit, 204-2016, Tolstoy Marg, Range-6(1), New Delhi-110001. New Delhi-110002. Pan-Aaact0835D Appellant Respondent Appellant By Sh. Sanjesh Kumar Jawarani, Ca Respondent By Sh. Farhat Khan, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 03.06.2021 Date Of Pronouncement 02.07.2021

which is given below: Explanation.-For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that for the purposes of this section, income of a non-resident shall be deemed to accrue or arise in India under clause (v) or clause (vi) or clause (vii) of sub- section (1) and shall ... included in the total income of the nonresident, whether or not,- (iii) the business or business connection in India; or (iv) the non-resident has rendered services in India. I have further considered the following points; Fee for technical services(FTS) is defined in explanation 2 to section

Amit Aggarwal, Delhi vs. ITO Ward-38(2), New Delhi

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

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri O.P. Kant[Through Video Conferencing] Assessment Year: 2011-12

appellant craves to add or amend any grounds of appeal. 2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the assessee is a non-resident Indian and permanent resident of United States of America (USA) and working as a professional doctor. On the basis of the Annual Information Return ... submission of the Learned Departmental Representative and perused the relevant material on record. The Learned CIT(A) has recorded that the assessee is a non-resident Indian and assessment has been completed in expertly manner due to non-compliance on the part of the assessee. She has mentioned that

Ge Intelligent Platforms Asia Pacific Pte. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT (International Taxation), New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

assessee had acquired the software independent of the equipment, and received a license to use the copyright in the software belonging to the non-resident. The non-resident supplier continued to be the owner of the copyright and all other intellectual property rights. As there was a transfer ... question which was posed before the High Court, was answered stating that the amounts paid by the concerned persons resident in India to non-resident, foreign software suppliers, amounted to royalty and as this was so, the same constituted taxable income deemed to accrue in India under section

Ge Intelligent Platforms Asia Pacific Pte. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT (International Taxation), Circle-1(3)(1), New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

assessee had acquired the software independent of the equipment, and received a license to use the copyright in the software belonging to the non-resident. The non-resident supplier continued to be the owner of the copyright and all other intellectual property rights. As there was a transfer ... question which was posed before the High Court, was answered stating that the amounts paid by the concerned persons resident in India to non-resident, foreign software suppliers, amounted to royalty and as this was so, the same constituted taxable income deemed to accrue in India under section

Expeditors International (India) Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-7(1), New Delhi

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conference)

favour has given a finding that the payments made by the assessee as GAM charges cannot be treated as payment of salary to non-resident but were in the nature of reimbursement of expenses and therefore assessee was not required to deduct TDS on such payments. We further find that ... taxpayer to M/s. Expeditors International of Washington Inc. on account of global account management expenses cannot be treated as payment of salary to non-resident but it was in the nature of reimbursement of expenses which cannot be subjected to deduction for TDS, provision

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Expeditors International India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conference)

favour has given a finding that the payments made by the assessee as GAM charges cannot be treated as payment of salary to non-resident but were in the nature of reimbursement of expenses and therefore assessee was not required to deduct TDS on such payments. We further find that ... taxpayer to M/s. Expeditors International of Washington Inc. on account of global account management expenses cannot be treated as payment of salary to non-resident but it was in the nature of reimbursement of expenses which cannot be subjected to deduction for TDS, provision

M/S. Expeditors International (India) Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi vs. CIT(A), New Delhi

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conference)

favour has given a finding that the payments made by the assessee as GAM charges cannot be treated as payment of salary to non-resident but were in the nature of reimbursement of expenses and therefore assessee was not required to deduct TDS on such payments. We further find that ... taxpayer to M/s. Expeditors International of Washington Inc. on account of global account management expenses cannot be treated as payment of salary to non-resident but it was in the nature of reimbursement of expenses which cannot be subjected to deduction for TDS, provision

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Expeditors International India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conference)

favour has given a finding that the payments made by the assessee as GAM charges cannot be treated as payment of salary to non-resident but were in the nature of reimbursement of expenses and therefore assessee was not required to deduct TDS on such payments. We further find that ... taxpayer to M/s. Expeditors International of Washington Inc. on account of global account management expenses cannot be treated as payment of salary to non-resident but it was in the nature of reimbursement of expenses which cannot be subjected to deduction for TDS, provision

DCIT, Circle- 11(1), New Delhi vs. Haskoningdhv Consulting Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. K. Narasimha Chary(Through Video Conferencing) Dcit Vs. Haskoningdhv Consulting Circle – 11(1) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi Lower Ground Floor, Chamber-1, Plot No.37, Street No.2, East Guru Nagad Nagar, New Delhi Pan No. Aaacm 8966 G Pin : 110092 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By --None-- Revenue By Shri Anurag Sharma Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 16/06/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 16/06/2021 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 28.02.2017 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-39, New Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeals: 1. “Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld Cit(A) Was Correct In Holding That The Issue Of Shares At Premium Dcit Vs Haskoningdhv Consulting Pvt. Ltd. A.Y. 2011-12 2 By Assessee Company To Its Non-Resident Holding Company Would Not Give Rise To The Income Is An International Transaction. 2. Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld Cit(A) Was Correct In Holding That The Provision Of Chapter X Would Have No Such Application In This Case Ignoring That Fact That The Purpose Of Enactment Of Chapter X, Is To Benchmark An International Transaction With The Fair Market Value Of Such Transaction, So As To Ensure That There Are No Profit Transfer Between Parties In Different Jurisdictions Effectually Circumventing Taxes. 3. The Appellant Craves Leave, To Add, Alter Or Amend Any Ground Of Appeal Raised Above At The Time Of Hearing.”

holding that the issue of shares at premium DCIT vs HaskoningDHV Consulting Pvt. Ltd. A.Y. 2011-12 2 by assessee company to its non-resident holding company would not give rise to the income is an international transaction. 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case

Ashish Bhardwaj, Ghaziabad vs. ITO Ward-36(4), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

that the assessee was resident in India and salary income earned by him was taxable in India. He also referred to the definition of non-resident u/s 2(30) of the IT Act and noted that the assessee had spent more than 60 days in India and fulfilled the conditions ... credited under the head ‘Salary ’ from Anglo Eastern Ship Management Ltd., Wanchai Hongkong. The Assessing Officer asked the Assessee to explain the status as non-resident in India during the relevant financial year. The Assessing Officer referred to the provisions of section 6 of the IT Act and held that

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Mr Gurcharan Singh, Delhi

In the result appeal of the Id

Bench: Shri Amit Shuklaa N D Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Acit, Shri Gurcharan Singh, Vs. 646, 1St Floor, Circle-47(1), Gali Ganteshwar, Katra Neel, Chandni Chowk, New Delhi. Delhi - 110 006. Pan: Atbps9241F (Appellant) (Respondent)

Delhi High Court in the case of Van Oord ACZ India (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT 189 Taxman 232 held that the payment to the non-resident foreign agents is subject to tax deduction at source under Section 195 of the Act and, therefore, the above sum of Rs.3

Sumitomo Corporation, New Delhi vs. DCIT (International Taxation), New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble(Through Video Conferencing) Sumitomo Corporation Vs Dcit (International Taxation) G-195, Circle-3(1)(2) Sarita Vihar New Delhi New Delhi Aabcs6011P (Appellant) (Respondent)

relating to addition of Rs. 7,31,67,674/- pertaining to computation of long-term capital gain on transfer of shares to a non-resident, the Ld. AR submitted 27 that in so far as the computation of capital gain made by the Assessing Officer in the draft order ... capital gain on the transfer of shares held and owned by it of M/s SML Isuzu Ltd. (Indian company) to Isuzu Motors Ltd., Japan (non-resident) at Rs. 90,93,355/- based upon the terms of the Share Purchase Agreement (SPA) under which the transfer of the shares was made

Hitachi Ltd., New Delhi vs. ADIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava(Through Video Conferencing) Hitachi Ltd. Vs. Adit Unit 304-306, 3Rd Floor, Circle – 1(2), Abw Eelgance Tower, International Taxation, Jasola District Centre New Delhi New Delhi - 110025 Pan : Aaach 2953 A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Tarandeep Singh, Adv Revenue By Shri Prabhakant, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 27/05/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 08/06/2021 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am:

Before us, Learned AR submitted that the AO has charged interest u/s 234-B of the Act. He submitted that assessee being a 11 non-resident company, entire tax was to be deducted at source by the payers to the assessee and therefore assessee was not liable for any interest

Amadeus India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle 2(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of assessee are allowed

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Amadeus India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit E-9, Connaught Hose, Circle – 2(2), Connaught Place, New Delhi New Delhi - 110001 Pan No. Aaaca 0364 L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Taran Deep Singh, Adv. Revenue By Shri Surender Pal, Cit-D.R. Date Of Hearing: 18/05/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 31/05/2021 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 19.09.2019 Of The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Delhi Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 144C(13) Of The Act Pursuant To The Direction Of Dispute Resolution Panel (Drp) – 1, Delhi For Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Relevant Facts As Culled From The Material On Records Are As Under :

sections 92, 92C, 92D and 92E, "international transaction" means a transaction between two or more associated enterprises, either or both of whom are non-residents, in the nature of purchase, sale or lease of tangible or intangible property, or provision of services, or lending or borrowing money, or any other ... Thus, under section 92B (1) an 'international transaction' means— '(a) a transaction between two or more associated enterprises, either or both of whom are non-resident, (b) the transaction is in the nature of purchase, sale or lease of tangible or intangible property or provision of service or lending

DCIT (International Taxation), New Delhi vs. M/S the Bank of Tokyo Mistubishi Ufj Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conference)

facts necessary for adjudication of the controversy at hand are : The Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd. (BTMU India), the taxpayer is a non-resident company incorporated in Japan, engaged in wholesale banking operations, 4 ITA No.283/Del./2016 CO No.126/Del/2016 mainly catering to the requirements of Japan based corporate

M/S Shri Shyam Sunder Infrastructure (P) Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri N.K. Billaiya

that any part of the share capital represented the company's own income from undisclosed sources. It was nobody's case that the non-resident Indian company was a bogus or non-existent company or that the amount subscribed by the company by way of share subscription was in fact

Vishwa Nath & Santosh Bakshi Charitable Educational Trust, New Delhi vs. CIT(E), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri B.R.R. Kumari.T.A. No.8498/Del/2019

should not be rejected. In answer thereto, it was submitted by the Trust that Sh. Sharad Malik was a Non-Resident Indian. Since he was the sole Trustee, meetings of the Trust were not required to be held. 3. The Trust informed the CIT(E) that it was created with

Pepsico India Holdongs Pvt Ltd, Gurgaon vs. ACIT Central Circle-07, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and the Stay Application of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 113/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year: 2016-17 Pepsico India Holdings Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, Level 3-6, Pioneer Square, Central Circle-07, Sector-62, Golf Course, Extension New Delhi Road, Gurgaon, Haryana-122101 (Appellantt (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacp1272G

period of time that detailed FAR analysis has to be carried out to identify all the functions of resident tax payer company and the non-resident AEs pertaining to all the international transactions like purchase of raw material, payment of royalty, purchase of finished goods, export of finished goods, support ... seen, whether marketing activities relating to DEMPE functions reflected in any such expenditure incurred by the resident tax payer company and the non-resident AE in India are in conformity with the functions and risk profiles and the benefit derived by the tax payer company