M/S. SKAPS INDUSTRIES INDIA PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO,(INTE. TAXN)-2,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assesee is allowed for both the assessment years

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

TDS officer levied interest under Section 201(1A) for the failure to withhold tax on the payments. 4. The assessee filed appeal against the aforesaid order before Ld. CIT(A). Ld. CIT(A) held that the payments received by Teems Electric (TEC) were business receipts and that, since TEC had a permanent establishment

M/S. SKAPS INDUSTRIES INDIA PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO,(INNT. TAXN)-2,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assesee is allowed for both the assessment years

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

TDS officer levied interest under Section 201(1A) for the failure to withhold tax on the payments. 4. The assessee filed appeal against the aforesaid order before Ld. CIT(A). Ld. CIT(A) held that the payments received by Teems Electric (TEC) were business receipts and that, since TEC had a permanent establishment

THE ACIT, CIRCLE- 2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. GUJARAT AMBUJA EXPORTS LIMITED,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Us.

Permanent services rendered by Establishment in India, them.*The assessee, however therefore, the commission is had failed to discharge the not taxable under any obligation. Therefore, the provision of Income Tax Act, expendituretlaimed under the hence, no TDS

THE DY.CIT (INT.-TAXA.)-1, , AHMEDABAD vs. ZYDUS LIFSCIENCE LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS CADILA HEALTHCARE LTD.), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

permanent establishment to the extent of income attributable to the PE. In its case none of the party have PE in India neither the assessee has PE in Thailand. 8. The assessee further submitted that the services were rendered by the foreign parties outside India in connection with the business carried on outside India (Thailand), hence the same is covered

M/S. JOY GLOBAL (UK) LIMITED,(EARLIER KNOWS AS JOY MINING MACHINERY LIMITED OR 'JMML'),KOLKATTA vs. THE ACIT (INT. TAXN.)-2,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, we allow the Grounds of Appeal of the assessee

permanent establishment, there must be a fixed place of business at the disposal of the enterprise through which the business of the enterprise is carried on. We find that the appellant company did not have any place of business/office/branch through which its business was carried on in India. The only income earned by the appellant company during the year under

ROTO WORLD FZE,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CPC , BANGLORE

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: DR. BRR KUMAR (Vice President), SHRI T.R SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

Permanent Establishment (PE) in India. The return of income was processed u/s.143(1) and intimation dated 10.06.2019 has issued by the DCIT, CPC wherein gross total income was considered at Rs.32,57,500/- instead of Rs. 16,28,750/- and tax thereon raised a demand of Rs.8,30,712/. An online rectification application was made by the assessee requesting rectification

THE DY.DIT, (INTL. TAXN.)- 1,, AHMEDABAD vs. VODAFONE WEST LTD., AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member आयकर अपील सं /Ita No.2398/Ahd/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2013-14 The Dcit (International Vodafone West Ltd. बनाम/ Taxation)-1 Vodafone House Ahmedabad Corporate Road V/S. Prahladnagar Off S.G. Highway Ahmedabad-380 051 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaacf 1190 P अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Dinal Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sudhakar Verma, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 04/07/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/07/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue As Against The Order Passed By The Ld.Commissioner Of Income-Tax(Appeals)-Gandhinagar (Ahmedabad) [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Ld.Cit(A)”], Dated 02/06/2014, Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Passed By The Dy.Director Of Income-Tax (International Taxation)-1, Ahmedabad (Ao) Under Section 201(1) & 201(1A) The Dcit (Intl.Taxn.)-1 Vs. Vodafone West Ltd. Asst. Year : 2013-14

permanent establishment of Mycom in India, business profits arising to Mycom from sale of software would not be taxable in India as per Article 7 of the India-UK tax treaty. 2.13. The AO, in his order, referring to Explanation 3 and 4 of section 9 of the Act, concluded that the payment under consideration is towards transfer of right

CADILA PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. ,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

TDS on expenses incurred in relation to non-residents amounting in all to Rs.67,33,167/-, detailed at page no.26 of his order as under: Payment Amount (In Rs.) Consultancy 17,30,262 Professional Consultancy (Chemical) 15,61,712 ITA No.73 & 76/Ahd/2020, and ITA No.51 & 52/Ahd/2020 DCIT Vs. Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd. 3 Legal & Professional Expenses

THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. CADILA PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. , AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

TDS on expenses incurred in relation to non-residents amounting in all to Rs.67,33,167/-, detailed at page no.26 of his order as under: Payment Amount (In Rs.) Consultancy 17,30,262 Professional Consultancy (Chemical) 15,61,712 ITA No.73 & 76/Ahd/2020, and ITA No.51 & 52/Ahd/2020 DCIT Vs. Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd. 3 Legal & Professional Expenses

THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. CADILA PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. , AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

TDS on expenses incurred in relation to non-residents amounting in all to Rs.67,33,167/-, detailed at page no.26 of his order as under: Payment Amount (In Rs.) Consultancy 17,30,262 Professional Consultancy (Chemical) 15,61,712 ITA No.73 & 76/Ahd/2020, and ITA No.51 & 52/Ahd/2020 DCIT Vs. Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd. 3 Legal & Professional Expenses

CADILA PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. ,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

TDS on expenses incurred in relation to non-residents amounting in all to Rs.67,33,167/-, detailed at page no.26 of his order as under: Payment Amount (In Rs.) Consultancy 17,30,262 Professional Consultancy (Chemical) 15,61,712 ITA No.73 & 76/Ahd/2020, and ITA No.51 & 52/Ahd/2020 DCIT Vs. Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd. 3 Legal & Professional Expenses

KIRI INDUSTRIES LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Dr.Brr Kumarshri Tr Senthil Kumar

TDS was effected on the commission payment. The said disallowance was confirmed by the Ld.CIT(A) 8. At the outset, it was submitted that the amounts have been paid to non-resident agents who are not tax payable entities in India for the services rendered abroad. The commission agents who have been paid commission do not have any permanent establishment

ATUL LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2017-18 Atul Limited Acit, Cir.1(1)(1) Atul House, Gi Patel Mark Vs Ahmedabad. Mithila Society, Ahmedabad. Pan : Aabca 2390 M (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Shri Bandish Soparkar, Ar : Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01/05/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 08/05/2025 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश

TDS by invoking Explanation 2 to Section 9(1)(vii) of the Act considering same as "fees for technical services" ignoring fact that said testing were done out of India and payee does not have any permanent establishment

M/S. HAATHEE VENTURES,,VADODARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1)(1),, VADODARA

In the result, ground number 3 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: The Hearing Of The Appeal.”

permanent establishment in India. It may be noted that in the recent case of PCIT v. Puma Sports India (P.) Ltd. [2022] 134 taxmann.com 60 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court dismissed Department’s SLP against impugned order of High Court holding that commission paid by assessee-company to its overseas Associated Enterprise (non-resident agent) for purchase orders outside

GUJARAT APOLLO INDUSTRIES LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Ms.Annapurna Gupta & T.R. Senthil Kumarasstt.Year : 2014-15 The Dcit, Cir.2(1)(1) Gujarat Apollo Industries Ltd. Ahmedabad. ‘Apollo House’ Rashmi Society Nr.Mithakhali Six Roads Navrangpura Ahmedabad 380 009. Pan : Aaacg 7248 P

permanent establishment in India; not having any chargeable income tax in India; and that similar claim was allowed by the ld.CIT(A) in the assessment year 2013-14. However, the ld.CIT(A) also not satisfied with the explanation of the assessee, mainly on the ground that the assessee has not proved each sales commission paid with documentary evidences, more

THE JCIT(OSD), CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ELECTROTHERM (INDIA) LIMITED,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Ms. Madhumita Roy

permanent establishment in India . It is also admitted facts as noted by AO in Para 4.2 of the assessment order that the appellant has claimed to have paid export commission to the foreign parties USA, UAE which is said to have been made for utilization of their services for procuring orders from overseas companies and services were said to have

ELECTROTHERM (INDIA) LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Ms. Madhumita Roy

permanent establishment in India . It is also admitted facts as noted by AO in Para 4.2 of the assessment order that the appellant has claimed to have paid export commission to the foreign parties USA, UAE which is said to have been made for utilization of their services for procuring orders from overseas companies and services were said to have

M/S. JOY GLOBAL (UK) LIMITED,(FORMERLY KNOWS AS JOY MINING MACHINERY LIMITED),KOLKATTA vs. THE ACIT (INT. TAXN.)-2,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 2891/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 M/S Joy Global(Uk) Limited, A.C.I.T., (Formerly Known As Joy Mining Vs. International Taxation)-2, Machinery Limited) Ahmedabad. C/O Joy Global (India) Ltd.,, 85/1, Topsia Road (South), Kolkata-700046. Pan: Aaccj3893R

permanent establishment, there must be a fixed place of business at the disposal of the enterprise through which the business of the enterprise is carried on. We find that the appellant company did not have any place of business/office/branch through which its business was carried on in India. The only income earned by the appellant company during the year under

ROTOMAG MOTORS & CONTROLS (P) LTD.,ANAND vs. THE DY.CIT, ANAND CIRCLE, ANAND

Appeal is allowed

TDS was deducted, the AO invoked section 40(a)(i)\nand disallowed Rs.1,42,197/-.\nBefore the AO, the assessee contended that the commission was paid\nfor services rendered outside India, that the foreign agents had no business\nconnection or permanent establishment