← All Phrases

“Section 9(1)(vii)”

Section References (mined)Section 9Section 9(1)(vii)933 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 9(1)(vii) is Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence (P) Ltd. v. CIT (432 ITR 471), cited in 914 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 9(1)(vii)

Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence (P) Ltd. v. CIT
432 ITR 471 · 2021 · Supreme Court
914
citing judgments

Payments for the supply or use of computer software, where there is no transfer of copyright but only a right to use the copyrighted product, are generally considered business profits and not 'royalty' or 'fees for technical services' under the Income Tax Act, 1961 or relevant DTAAs. This principle also applies to transponder fees, which are not taxable as royalty.

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.

DIT v. New Skies Satellite BV
382 ITR 114 · 2016 · High Court
325
citing judgments

An amendment to the Income Tax Act, such as the Finance Act, 2012 amendment to Section 9(1)(vi) defining royalty, does not automatically override or alter the definition of 'royalty' as provided in a Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) unless the DTAA itself is bilaterally amended. The definition of royalty in a DTAA remains unaffected by unilateral changes to domestic law.

DIT v. Nokia Networks OY
358 ITR 259 · 2013 · High Court
276
citing judgments

Payments for the supply of software along with telecom equipment are not in the nature of royalty if they are for the use of a copyrighted article, not the copyright itself. Such payments are not taxable in India in the absence of a Permanent Establishment (PE).

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.

Judgments citing Section 9(1)(vii)

Vodafone Essar Mobile Services Ltd., New Delhi vs. JCIT, New Delhi

ITA 5144/DEL/2011[2009-10 (F.Y. 2008-09)]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2024

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

Section 194Section 194HSection 194JSection 9(1)(vii)

intervention and charges received or paid on account of this is not fees for technical services as envisaged in Section 1941 read with Section 9(1)(vii) read with Explanation-2 of the Act. In case before us, the assessee has paid roaming charges i.e. IUC Charges to various operators

Vodafone Essar Mobile Services Ltd., New Delhi vs. JCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 5143/DEL/2011[2008-09 (F.Y.-2007-08)]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2024

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Rahul Chaudharyassessment Year: 2003-04 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Vodafone Mobile Assistant Commissioner Services Limited Of Income Tax Circle C-45, 51(1) Okhla Indusrial Area, Vs. Aayakar Bhawan, Phase Ii, Distt. Centre, New Delhi- 110020 Laxmi Nagar, Pan: Aaacs4457Q New Delhi. Appellant : Respondent Assessment Year: 2008-09 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Vodafone Mobile Joint Commissioner Of Services Limited Income Tax Circle 51(1) C-45, Aayakar Bhawan, Okhla Indusrial Area, Vs. Distt. Centre, Phase Ii, Laxmi Nagar, New Delhi- 110020 New Delhi. Pan: Aaacs4457Q Appellant : Respondent

For Appellant: RespondentFor Respondent: Ms. Vatsala Jha (PCIT)
Section 194Section 194HSection 194JSection 9(1)(vii)

intervention and charges received or paid on account of this is not fees for technical services as envisaged in Section 1941 read with Section 9(1)(vii) read with Explanation-2 of the Act. In case before us, the assessee has paid roaming charges i.e. IUC Charges to various operators

Vodafone Essar Mobile Services Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 5142/DEL/2011[2003-04 (F.Y. 2002-03)]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2024

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

Section 194Section 194HSection 194JSection 9(1)(vii)

intervention and charges received or paid on account of this is not fees for technical services as envisaged in Section 1941 read with Section 9(1)(vii) read with Explanation-2 of the Act. In case before us, the assessee has paid roaming charges i.e. IUC Charges to various operators

Shell International B.V., Mumbai vs. The ACIT, Circle (International Taxation-1), Ahmedabad

In the result, Ground No. 10 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 688/AHD/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Nov 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CIT DR
Section 153

that CHR Recruitment Fees, External Information Services (license for online databases) and IT Migration Support Services qualify as fee for technical services under Section 9(1)(vii) of the Act read with Article 12 of Tax Treaty Shell International B.V. vs. ACIT (International Taxation) Asst.Year ... very broad connotation and it has been used elsewhere in the Statute also so widely as to comprehend professional services : vide Section 9(1) (vii) ". The relevant meanings of the word 'technical' given in the New Shorter Oxford Dictionary (Thumb Index Edition) are 1. Of a person : having knowledge

Piramal Capital and Housing Finance Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax TDS - 2 (1), Mumbai

Accordingly, in terms of paragraph 13 & 17 above, all the four appeals preferred by the Assessee are allowed

ITA 2351/MUM/2024[AY 2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Nov 2024

Bench: IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "C" BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, Shri RonakFor Respondent: Ms. Madhu Malati Ghosh &
Section 191Section 193Section 194Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)

termed as "interest" within the meaning of section 2(28A) or "fees for technical services for service" within the meaning of section 9(1)(vii). 10. The definition of "interest" u/s 2(28A) reads as under:- "interest" means interest payable in any manner in respect of any moneys borrowed

Piramal Capital and Housing Finance Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax TDS - 2 (1), Mumbai

Accordingly, in terms of paragraph 13 & 17 above, all the four appeals preferred by the Assessee are allowed

ITA 2348/MUM/2024[AY 2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Nov 2024

Bench: SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, Shri RonakFor Respondent: Ms. Madhu Malati Ghosh &
Section 191Section 193Section 194Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)

termed as "interest" within the meaning of section 2(28A) or "fees for technical services for service" within the meaning of section 9(1)(vii). 10. The definition of "interest" u/s 2(28A) reads as under:- "interest" means interest payable in any manner in respect of any moneys borrowed

Piramal Capital and Housing Finance Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax TDS - 2 (1), Mumbai

Accordingly, in terms of paragraph 13 & 17 above, all the four appeals preferred by the Assessee are allowed

ITA 2347/MUM/2024[AY 2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Nov 2024

Bench: SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, Shri RonakFor Respondent: Ms. Madhu Malati Ghosh &
Section 191Section 193Section 194Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)

termed as "interest" within the meaning of section 2(28A) or "fees for technical services for service" within the meaning of section 9(1)(vii). 10. The definition of "interest" u/s 2(28A) reads as under:- "interest" means interest payable in any manner in respect of any moneys borrowed

Piramal Capital and Housing Finance Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax TDS - 2 (1), Mumbai

Accordingly, in terms of paragraph 13 & 17 above, all the four appeals preferred by the Assessee are allowed

ITA 2345/MUM/2024[AY 2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Nov 2024

Bench: SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, Shri RonakFor Respondent: Ms. Madhu Malati Ghosh &
Section 191Section 193Section 194Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)

termed as "interest" within the meaning of section 2(28A) or "fees for technical services for service" within the meaning of section 9(1)(vii). 10. The definition of "interest" u/s 2(28A) reads as under:- "interest" means interest payable in any manner in respect of any moneys borrowed

DCIT (It) -3.1.2, Income Tax Office, Kautiliya Bhawan vs. Linklaters and Paines, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the department is accordingly dismissed having become infructuous

ITA 5116/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri. Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri. Raj Kumar Chauhandcit (It) 3.1.2 Vs. Linklaters & Paines Room No.603, 6Th Floor, Kautilya C/O – Deloitte Haskins & Sells, Bhavan, Mumbai – 400051. Tower 3, 28Th - 30Th Floor, Indiabulls Finance Centre, Senapati Bapat Marg, Mumbai. Pan: Aabfl2160M (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115Section 250Section 9Section 9(1)(vii)

Article — 5(2)(k)(i), without considering that the receipts of the assessee is fees for technical services as per meaning of section 9(1)(vii), Explanation 2 and therefore is taxable on gross basis under section 1154 of the Income Tax Act. iii. Whether on the fact

Digcert Inc, Usa vs. ACIT, Income Tax Officer, Circle Int. Taxation 1(2)(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 3626/DEL/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri M. Balaganeshdigicert Inc. Vs. Acit, 2600, West Executive Pkwy, Income Tax Officer, Suite 500 Lehi, Utah, Foreign, Circle International United States Taxation-1(2)(2), New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaecd9837H Assessee By : Ms. Tanmayee Rajkumar, Adv Revenue By: Shri Vijay B. Basanta, Cit(Dr) Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 25/10/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 14/11/2024

For Appellant: Ms. Tanmayee Rajkumar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vijay B. Basanta, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(13)Section 9(1)(vii)

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “D”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI M

Rockwell Collins, Inc., United States of America vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle 3(1)(1), Delhi

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

ITA 2410/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharmarockwell Collins Vs. Dcit, Southeast Asia Pte Ltd, Circle-3(1)(1), 18, Loyang Lane, Delhi 508918, Singapore, Singapore (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aajcr7985R Rockwell Collins Inc, Vs. Dcit, 400, Collins Rd Ne, Circle-3(1)(1), Cedar Rapids, Ia 52498, Delhi United States Of America, Usa,52498 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aajcr7883E

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora, CAFor Respondent: Ms. C. Chandra Kanta, CIT DR
Section 9(1)(vii)

account of repairs and maintenance of aircraft equipment do not constitute payment for „technical services‟ as defined in Explanation 2 to section 9(1)(vii) of the Act ; and that the repairs and maintenance services are routine maintenance services and not technical services as per the Act. The assessee placed ... Trib) wherein, it was held that services for repairs and maintenance of aircraft cannot be termed as technical services as defined in section 9(1)(vii) of the Act and rather it falls under the category of works contract as per section 194C of the Act which fact is also

Rockwell Collins Southeast Asia Pte Ltd, Singapore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 3(1)(1), Civic Centre, Delhi

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

ITA 2409/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharmarockwell Collins Vs. Dcit, Southeast Asia Pte Ltd, Circle-3(1)(1), 18, Loyang Lane, Delhi 508918, Singapore, Singapore (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aajcr7985R Rockwell Collins Inc, Vs. Dcit, 400, Collins Rd Ne, Circle-3(1)(1), Cedar Rapids, Ia 52498, Delhi United States Of America, Usa,52498 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aajcr7883E

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora, CAFor Respondent: Ms. C. Chandra Kanta, CIT DR
Section 9(1)(vii)

account of repairs and maintenance of aircraft equipment do not constitute payment for „technical services‟ as defined in Explanation 2 to section 9(1)(vii) of the Act ; and that the repairs and maintenance services are routine maintenance services and not technical services as per the Act. The assessee placed ... Trib) wherein, it was held that services for repairs and maintenance of aircraft cannot be termed as technical services as defined in section 9(1)(vii) of the Act and rather it falls under the category of works contract as per section 194C of the Act which fact is also

Mma Offshore Asia Vessel Operations Pte Ltd., Singapore vs. CIT (International Taxation)-3, Mumbai

ITA 2567/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi/Punit Lohiya, A/RsFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna, D/R
Section 142(1)Section 195Section 263

inextricably linked with prospecting, extraction or production of mineral oils, will not be considered as FTS within the meaning of Explanation to section 9(1)(vii) of the Act. Further, the Supreme Court has also summarised certain scope of work which would be very well covered within the ambit ... inextricably linked with prospecting, extraction or production of mineral oils, will not be considered as FTS within the meaning of Explanation to section 9(1)(vii) of the Act In the instant case, your goodself would appreciate that the contract of MMA is with BGEPIL, which has entered into

Mma Offshore Asia Vessel Operations Pte Ltd., Singapore vs. CIT (International Taxation)-3, Mumbai

ITA 2566/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi/Punit Lohiya, A/RsFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna, D/R
Section 142(1)Section 195Section 263

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण न्यायपीठ, मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON

M/S Model Exim, Kanpur vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Kanpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 137/LKW/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow05 Nov 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguriam/S. Model Exim Pcit (Central) V. 624-C, Defence Colony, 7/81-B, Tilak Nagar, Jajmau, Kanpur-208010. Kanpur. Pan:Aadfm6163H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Swaran Singh, C.A. Respondent By: Smt Namita S. Pandey, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 29 10 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 05 11 2024 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Swaran Singh, C.AFor Respondent: Smt Namita S. Pandey, CIT(DR)
Section 139Section 153CSection 153DSection 263Section 263(1)

income tax at source u/s 195 of the IT Act. As per provisions of section 195 of the IT Act, 1961 read with section 9(1)(vii), it is mandatory to deduct tax at source. The applicable provision has been contained under section 9 ... term “income deemed to accrue or arise in India” and liability of the assessee to deduct income tax at source on “other sums”, Section 9(1)(vii) of IT 1961 under: The following income deemed to accrue or arise in India: Page 10 of 24 (vii). Income

Daechang Seat Co Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, International Taxation 1(1), Chennai

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1301/CHNY/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 1301/Chny/2023 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Daechang Seat Co Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of 491, Mannur Village, Valarpuram V. Income Tax, Post, Sriperumbudur Tk, International Taxation 1(1), Kancheepuram District – 602 105. Chennai. [Pan: Aadcd-4448-B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri. Shreyansh Kumar Kochar, Ca : Smt. M.S. Deeptha, Jcit ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05.08.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30.10.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. Shreyansh Kumar Kochar, CA
Section 143(1)Section 250

under Article 11 of the India- Korea DTAA. b) The guarantee fees would also not fall under 'Fees for Technical service' as per section 9(1)(vii) of the Act or under the India - Korea DTAA. :-7-: ITA. No: 1301/Chny/2023 c) The guarantee fees would fall under the nature

Hcl Technologies Norway As, Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi

In the result, similar grounds of appeal, in all the captioned

ITA 2300/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vijay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 144C(13)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 153(2)

purpose of serving overseas customers directly, as one entity providing services to the other entity. 6 Payments not chargeable to tax under section 9(1)(vii) of the Act 6.1 That the DRP/ assessing officer erred on facts and in law in holding that payments received by the Appellant during ... outside India and therefore, did not accrue or arise in India so as to be chargeable to tax in India in terms of section 9(1)(vii) of the Act. 6.3 That the DRP/assessing officer erred on facts and in law in not appreciating that the exception provided

Hcl Australia Services Pty Limited, Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi

In the result, similar grounds of appeal, in all the captioned

ITA 2299/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vijay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 144C(13)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 153(2)

purpose of serving overseas customers directly, as one entity providing services to the other entity. 6 Payments not chargeable to tax under section 9(1)(vii) of the Act 6.1 That the DRP/ assessing officer erred on facts and in law in holding that payments received by the Appellant during ... outside India and therefore, did not accrue or arise in India so as to be chargeable to tax in India in terms of section 9(1)(vii) of the Act. 6.3 That the DRP/assessing officer erred on facts and in law in not appreciating that the exception provided

Hcl Singapore Pte. Ltd (Successor to Axon Solutions Singapore Pte Limited), Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi

In the result, similar grounds of appeal, in all the captioned

ITA 2298/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vijay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 144C(13)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 153(2)

purpose of serving overseas customers directly, as one entity providing services to the other entity. 6 Payments not chargeable to tax under section 9(1)(vii) of the Act 6.1 That the DRP/ assessing officer erred on facts and in law in holding that payments received by the Appellant during ... outside India and therefore, did not accrue or arise in India so as to be chargeable to tax in India in terms of section 9(1)(vii) of the Act. 6.3 That the DRP/assessing officer erred on facts and in law in not appreciating that the exception provided

M/S. Tirubala International Private Limited, Kanpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-VI, Kanpur

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

ITA 147/LKW/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow25 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2014-15 Tirubala International Pvt. Ltd., Deputy Commissioner Of C-7, Panki Industrial Area, Vs. Income Tax, Range-Vi, Kanpur Kanpur, U.P. Pan:Aaect2086J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Vikas Garg, Fca Revenue By: Sh. Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 02.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.10.2024 O R D E R Per Sh. Nikhil Choudhary: This Is An Appeal Filed Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Dismissing The Appeal Of The Assessee That Was Filed Against The Order Of The Dcit-6, Kanpur Passed On 19.12.2016. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “1. That The Ao, Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Making An Addition Of Rs. 29,164/- On Account Of Late Payment Towards Employees Contribution To Esi. 2. That The Authorities Below Have Failed To Appreciate That The Payment Of Rs.29,164 Towards Employee'S Contribution To Provident Fund Was Made Before The "Due Date" Of Filing Return Of Income U/S 139(1) Of The Income Tax Act 1961 Therefore There Could Not Be Any Addition Of The Aforesaid Amount To The Returned Income. 3. That The Authorities Below Have Failed To Appreciate That The Due Date As Mentioned In 36(1) (Va) Is To Be Read In Conjunction With Section 43B(B)

For Appellant: Sh. Vikas Garg, FCAFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl CIT DR
Section 139(1)Section 195Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 43B

such certification that goods did not contain any harmful substance was a payment in the nature of, ‘fee for technical services’ covered under section 9(1)(vii) of the Act. He pointed out that as per the explanation to section 9 of the Act, whether the income