IBM CORPORATION,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-1(2)(1) , BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

section 197, in respect to deductibility of tax on similar receipts - The CIT(A) highlighted that section 195(2) and section 197 of the Act are in the nature of safeguard sections to make sure that taxes are rightfully deducted on payments. - The CIT(A) has thereafter contended that the Assessee has not availed any of the safeguards and basis

IBM ISRAEL LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX , INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-CIRCLE-1(2) , BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

section 197, in respect to deductibility of tax on similar receipts - The CIT(A) highlighted that section 195(2) and section 197 of the Act are in the nature of safeguard sections to make sure that taxes are rightfully deducted on payments. - The CIT(A) has thereafter contended that the Assessee has not availed any of the safeguards and basis

IBM UNITED KINGDOM LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX , INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

section 197, in respect to deductibility of tax on similar receipts - The CIT(A) highlighted that section 195(2) and section 197 of the Act are in the nature of safeguard sections to make sure that taxes are rightfully deducted on payments. - The CIT(A) has thereafter contended that the Assessee has not availed any of the safeguards and basis

IBM CANADA LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

reassessment\nproceedings.\nThe CIT(A) has distinguished the facts\nof the case from Karnataka HC's\nruling in Manjunatha Cotton &\nGinning Factory [2013] 35\nTaxmann.com 250 (Karnataka HC)\nThe CIT(A) has concluded that the\nprovisions of 270A(8) need not be\ninvoked and that the case of the\nAssessee is covered under section\n270A(2)(a) / 270A(2

IBM CHINA HONG KONG LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-1(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

section\n195(2) and section 197 of the Act are\nin the nature of safeguard sections to\nmake sure that taxes are rightfully\ndeducted on payments.\nRebuttal to the CIT(A)'s observations\nProvisions of section 195(2)/ 197 of the\nAct are not mandatory and therefore the\nAO cannot be expected to seek recourse\nto the same.\nTherefore

IBM UNITED KINGDOM LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX , INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

263 nor has been reassessed under section 147\nof the Act;\n4.5.5 Assuming but not admitting, in case of conflicting rulings, the\nAssessee is entitled to place reliance on rulings favorable to him and\nought not to be penalized for adopting a favourable view in the said\nissue. Relevant judicial precedents were discussed to justify that\nnon-acceptance

IBM CANADA LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

263 nor has been reassessed under section 147\nof the Act;\n4.5.5 Assuming but not admitting, in case of conflicting rulings, the\nAssessee is entitled to place reliance on rulings favorable to him and\nought not to be penalized for adopting a favourable view in the said\nissue. Relevant judicial precedents were discussed to justify that\nnon-acceptance

IBM CANADA LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-1(2) , BANGALORE

The appeals of the assessees are allowed

reassessment\nproceedings.\nThe CIT(A) has distinguished the facts\nof the case from Karnataka HC's\nruling in Manjunatha Cotton &\nGinning Factory [2013] 35\nTaxmann.com 250 (Karnataka HC)\nThe CIT(A) has concluded that the\nprovisions of 270A(8) need not be\ninvoked and that the case of the\nAssessee is covered under section\n270A(2)(a) / 270A(2

IBM JAPAN LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-1(2) , BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

263 nor has been reassessed under section 147\nof the Act;\n4.5.5 Assuming but not admitting, in case of conflicting rulings, the\nAssessee is entitled to place reliance on rulings favorable to him and\nought not to be penalized for adopting a favourable view in the said\nissue. Relevant judicial precedents were discussed to justify that\nnon-acceptance

COMPAGNIE IBM FRANCE,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

2) and section 197 of the Act are\nin the nature of safeguard sections to\nmake sure that taxes are rightfully\ndeducted on payments.\nTherefore, the same isn't sufficient\nground to contend that the Assessee's\nconduct is not bonafide.\nDeduction under section 192 of the Act\nestablishes\nemployer-employee\nrelationship and is therefore relevant.\nThis aspect has also

IBM CANADA LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

reassessment\nproceedings.\nThe CIT(A) has distinguished the facts\nof the case from Karnataka HC's\nruling in Manjunatha Cotton &\nGinning Factory [2013] 35\nTaxmann.com 250 (Karnataka HC)\nThe CIT(A) has concluded that the\nprovisions of 270A(8) need not be\ninvoked and that the case of the\nAssessee is covered under section\n270A(2)(a) / 270A(2

IBM OSTERREICH INTIONATIONALE BUROMASCHINEN GESELLSCHAFT MBH,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

263 nor has been reassessed under section 147\nof the Act;\n4.5.5 Assuming but not admitting, in case of conflicting rulings, the\nAssessee is entitled to place reliance on rulings favorable to him and\nought not to be penalized for adopting a favourable view in the said\nissue. Relevant judicial precedents were discussed to justify that\nnon-acceptance

IBM AUSTRALIA LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-CIRCLE-1(2) , BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

263 nor has been reassessed under section 147\nof the Act;\n4.5.5 Assuming but not admitting, in case of conflicting rulings, the\nAssessee is entitled to place reliance on rulings favorable to him and\nought not to be penalized for adopting a favourable view in the said\nissue. Relevant judicial precedents were discussed to justify that\nnon-acceptance

IBM JAPAN LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX , INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

263 nor has been reassessed under section 147\nof the Act;\n4.5.5 Assuming but not admitting, in case of conflicting rulings, the\nAssessee is entitled to place reliance on rulings favorable to him and\nought not to be penalized for adopting a favourable view in the said\nissue. Relevant judicial precedents were discussed to justify that\nnon-acceptance

IBM JAPAN LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX , INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-CIRCLE-1(2) , BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

reassessment\nproceedings.\nThe CIT(A) has distinguished the facts\nof the case from Karnataka HC's\nruling in Manjunatha Cotton &\nGinning Factory [2013] 35\nTaxmann.com 250 (Karnataka HC)\nThe CIT(A) has concluded that the\nprovisions of 270A(8) need not be\ninvoked and that the case of the\nAssessee is covered under section\n270A(2)(a) / 270A(2

COMPAGNIE IBM FRANCE,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

263 nor has been reassessed under section 147\nof the Act;\n4.5.5 Assuming but not admitting, in case of conflicting rulings, the\nAssessee is entitled to place reliance on rulings favorable to him and\nought not to be penalized for adopting a favourable view in the said\nissue. Relevant judicial precedents were discussed to justify that\nnon-acceptance

IBM UNITED KINGDOM LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

263 nor has been reassessed under section 147\nof the Act;\n\n4.5.5\nAssuming but not admitting, in case of conflicting rulings, the\nAssessee is entitled to place reliance on rulings favorable to him and\nought not to be penalized for adopting a favourable view in the said\nissue. Relevant judicial precedents were discussed to justify that\nnon-acceptance

IBM AUSTRALIA LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

263 nor has been reassessed under section 147\nof the Act;\n4.5.5 Assuming but not admitting, in case of conflicting rulings, the\nAssessee is entitled to place reliance on rulings favorable to him and\nought not to be penalized for adopting a favourable view in the said\nissue. Relevant judicial precedents were discussed to justify that\nnon-acceptance