BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

2,985 results for “TDS”+ Section 9(1)(v)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai3,231Delhi2,985Bangalore2,005Chennai1,508Kolkata733Ahmedabad409Hyderabad385Cochin370Pune345Jaipur307Raipur281Karnataka261Chandigarh241Indore166Surat134Nagpur118Visakhapatnam101Lucknow99Rajkot96Amritsar81Cuttack64Dehradun44Jabalpur43Telangana42Patna40Guwahati40Jodhpur39Agra30Panaji27Allahabad25Ranchi24SC16Varanasi15Kerala13Calcutta8Himachal Pradesh6Rajasthan4Uttarakhand2J&K1Orissa1Gauhati1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Addition to Income60Section 143(3)45Disallowance34Deduction31TDS31Section 4028Section 14722Section 15420Section 194C18Section 148

MR. SANJEEV GUPTA,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, ground No. 3 and 4 With respect to the disallowance of export commission of the appeal of the assessee are allowed

ITA 3366/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishisanjeev Gupta, Vs. Addl. Cit, E-31, Kamla Nagar, Range-20, New Delhi New Delhi Pan:Ahcpg7326A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Satish Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kaushlendra Tiwari, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 195Section 40Section 5Section 5(2)(b)Section 9Section 9(1)(i)

v. Faizan Shoes (P.) Ltd. [2014] 367 ITR 155/226 Taxman 115/48 taxmann.com 48 (Mad.), the assessee is not liable to deduct tax at source, when the non-resident agent provides services outside India on payment of commission. 5.2 The contention of the Revenue is that such services are attracted by Explanation (2) to Section 9 (1

Showing 1–20 of 2,985 · Page 1 of 150

...
15
Double Taxation/DTAA15
Section 14314

TRANS WORLD INTERNATIONAL LLC,WILMINGTON, DELAWARE, USA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TA, CIRCLE 3(1)(1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIVIC CENTRE, NEAR MINTO ROAD, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2146/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 147Section 148

TDS') amounting to INR 1,77,696/- and self-assessment tax credit of INR 31,22,870/- whilst computing the tax liability of the Appellant for the year under consideration. 9. That in the facts and circumstances of the case & in law, the Ld. AO has erred in initiating penalty proceedings under section 274 read with 271F

BHARTI AIRTEL LTD.,GURGAON vs. ITO (TDS), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the Appeals of the Assessee are allowed and all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 3594/DEL/2012[2009-10 (F.Y. 2008-09)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Mar 2016

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy

For Appellant: Sh. S.K. Tulsiyan, Adv., ShFor Respondent: Sh. Anuj Arora, CIT(DR)
Section 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 9Section 9(1)(vii)

TDS) vs. Bharti Airtel Ltd.] IV. Whether the payment made by the assessee can be deemed to accrue or arise in India u/s. 9(1)(vi)(b)/ 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act. V. Whether “make available” clause under DTAA is satisfied. VI. Whether there is no FTS clause in the relevant DTAA, where the payment are taxable

ITO (TDS), NEW DELHI vs. BHARTI AIRTEL LTD., GURGAON

In the result, all the Appeals of the Assessee are allowed and all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 4077/DEL/2012[2009-10 (F.Y. 2008-09)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Mar 2016

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy

For Appellant: Sh. S.K. Tulsiyan, Adv., ShFor Respondent: Sh. Anuj Arora, CIT(DR)
Section 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 9Section 9(1)(vii)

TDS) vs. Bharti Airtel Ltd.] IV. Whether the payment made by the assessee can be deemed to accrue or arise in India u/s. 9(1)(vi)(b)/ 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act. V. Whether “make available” clause under DTAA is satisfied. VI. Whether there is no FTS clause in the relevant DTAA, where the payment are taxable

ITO (TDS), NEW DELHI vs. BHARTI AIRTEL LTD., GURGAON

In the result, all the Appeals of the Assessee are allowed and all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 4076/DEL/2012[2008-09 (F.Y. 2007-08)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Mar 2016

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy

For Appellant: Sh. S.K. Tulsiyan, Adv., ShFor Respondent: Sh. Anuj Arora, CIT(DR)
Section 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 9Section 9(1)(vii)

TDS) vs. Bharti Airtel Ltd.] IV. Whether the payment made by the assessee can be deemed to accrue or arise in India u/s. 9(1)(vi)(b)/ 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act. V. Whether “make available” clause under DTAA is satisfied. VI. Whether there is no FTS clause in the relevant DTAA, where the payment are taxable

BHARTI AIRTEL LTD.,GURGAON vs. ITO (TDS), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the Appeals of the Assessee are allowed and all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 3596/DEL/2012[2011-12 (F.Y. 2010-11)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Mar 2016

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy

For Appellant: Sh. S.K. Tulsiyan, Adv., ShFor Respondent: Sh. Anuj Arora, CIT(DR)
Section 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 9Section 9(1)(vii)

TDS) vs. Bharti Airtel Ltd.] IV. Whether the payment made by the assessee can be deemed to accrue or arise in India u/s. 9(1)(vi)(b)/ 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act. V. Whether “make available” clause under DTAA is satisfied. VI. Whether there is no FTS clause in the relevant DTAA, where the payment are taxable

BHARTI AIRTEL LTD.,GURGAON vs. ITO (TDS), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the Appeals of the Assessee are allowed and all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 3595/DEL/2012[2010-11 (F.Y. 2009-10)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Mar 2016

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy

For Appellant: Sh. S.K. Tulsiyan, Adv., ShFor Respondent: Sh. Anuj Arora, CIT(DR)
Section 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 9Section 9(1)(vii)

TDS) vs. Bharti Airtel Ltd.] IV. Whether the payment made by the assessee can be deemed to accrue or arise in India u/s. 9(1)(vi)(b)/ 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act. V. Whether “make available” clause under DTAA is satisfied. VI. Whether there is no FTS clause in the relevant DTAA, where the payment are taxable

BHARTI AIRTEL LTD.,GURGAON vs. ITO (TDS), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the Appeals of the Assessee are allowed and all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 3593/DEL/2012[2008-09 (F.Y. 2007-08)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Mar 2016

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy

For Appellant: Sh. S.K. Tulsiyan, Adv., ShFor Respondent: Sh. Anuj Arora, CIT(DR)
Section 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 9Section 9(1)(vii)

TDS) vs. Bharti Airtel Ltd.] IV. Whether the payment made by the assessee can be deemed to accrue or arise in India u/s. 9(1)(vi)(b)/ 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act. V. Whether “make available” clause under DTAA is satisfied. VI. Whether there is no FTS clause in the relevant DTAA, where the payment are taxable

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. SH. KULBEER SINGH, NEW DELHI

ITA 5204/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishiito, Vs. Kulbeer Singh, Ward-26(1), H-432, Vikas Puri, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Amqps5847P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 195Section 197Section 40Section 9

TDS liability on such commission is an offshoot from its chargeability to Income tax under Section 5(2) of the Act. 5.3 Section 195 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 reads as follows “ (1) Any person responsible for paying to a non-resident, not being a company, or to a foreign company, any interest or any other sum chargeable under

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX DELHI vs. M/S LUFTHANSA CARGO INDIA P .

ITA/95/2005HC Delhi27 May 2015

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA

Section 195Section 260ASection 9(1)(vii)

TDS. With reference to payments made to residents of UK and USA, the CIT (A) held that they were not in the nature of „fees for technical or included services‟ under Article 12 of the DTAA read with the Memorandum of Understanding with USA which equally applied to the UK Treaty. Payments made to residents of USA and UK were

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX DELHI vs. M/S LUFTHANSA CARGO INDIA P .

ITA - 95 / 2005HC Delhi27 May 2015
Section 195Section 260ASection 9(1)(vii)

TDS. With reference to payments made to residents of UK and USA, the CIT (A) held that they were not in the nature of „fees for technical or included services‟ under Article 12 of the DTAA read with the Memorandum of Understanding with USA which equally applied to the UK Treaty. Payments made to residents of USA and UK were

M/S. BAIN & COMPANY INDIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ITO (TDS) (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), NEW DELHI

ITA 2845/DEL/2016[2009-10 (F.Y. 2008-09)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Nov 2021
For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Sinha &For Respondent: Shri Umesh Takiyar, Sr. DR

9(1)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, the persons liable to deduct TDS under section 195 of the Income Tax Act ought to have deducted tax at source on the footing that explanation 4 existed on the statute book with effect from 1976. We have, therefore, to examine as to whether persons liable to deduct TDS under section

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. ERICSSON A.B.,NEW DELHI.

ITA-504/2007HC Delhi23 Dec 2011

v), (vi) and (vii) of sub-section (1) of Section 9, such income shall be included in the total income of the non-resident, regardless of whether the non-resident has a residence or place of business or 2011:DHC:6682-DB ITA 504/2007, ITA 507/2007, ITA 508/2007,ITA 511/2007, ITA 397/2007 Page 69 of 75 business connection in India

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX

ITA/504/2007HC Delhi23 Dec 2011

v), (vi) and (vii) of sub-section (1) of Section 9, such income shall be included in the total income of the non-resident, regardless of whether the non-resident has a residence or place of business or 2011:DHC:6682-DB ITA 504/2007, ITA 507/2007, ITA 508/2007,ITA 511/2007, ITA 397/2007 Page 69 of 75 business connection in India

SYSTEMS AMERICA (INDIA) LTD. vs. ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,,

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and that of the Department is dismissed

ITA 905/DEL/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2018AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Respondent: Sh. M. Baranwal, Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 10A(9)Section 195Section 234BSection 250Section 35DSection 37(1)Section 80

1) of the Act. The reliance was placed on the following case laws:- i. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Virat Investment and Merchantile Co. [2017] 392 ITR 202(Delhi) ii. India Cements Limited vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Madras [1966] 60 ITR 52, 1966 AIR 1053, 1966(2) SCR 944 27. As regards to the remaining expenses

ACIT, CIRCLE-7(1) vs. SYSTEM AMERICA INDIA LTD.,,

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and that of the Department is dismissed

ITA 1492/DEL/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2018AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Respondent: Sh. M. Baranwal, Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 10A(9)Section 195Section 234BSection 250Section 35DSection 37(1)Section 80

1) of the Act. The reliance was placed on the following case laws:- i. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Virat Investment and Merchantile Co. [2017] 392 ITR 202(Delhi) ii. India Cements Limited vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Madras [1966] 60 ITR 52, 1966 AIR 1053, 1966(2) SCR 944 27. As regards to the remaining expenses

AMAZON WEB SERVICES, INC.,USA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), NEW DELHI

Accordingly, ground No. 3 along with its sub-grounds 3.1 to 3.4, ground No. 4 and ground No. 5 along with its sub-ground 5.1 r.w ground No. 2 are allowed

ITA 522/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: FixedITAT Delhi01 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 144CSection 147Section 151Section 201Section 9(1)(vi)

TDS has been deducted by the remitter nor the assessee filed ITR for the relevant AYs. Accordingly, notice under section 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee on 31.03.2021 in response to which the assessee filed its return of income for both the AYs under consideration on 28.04.2021 declaring income of Rs. Nil. Thereafter statutory notices were issued

AMAZON WEB SERVICES, INC.,USA vs. ACIT CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL TAX 1(1)(1), NEW DELHI

Accordingly, ground No. 3 along with its sub-grounds 3.1 to 3.4, ground No. 4 and ground No. 5 along with its sub-ground 5.1 r.w ground No. 2 are allowed

ITA 523/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: FixedITAT Delhi01 Aug 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 144CSection 147Section 151Section 201Section 9(1)(vi)

TDS has been deducted by the remitter nor the assessee filed ITR for the relevant AYs. Accordingly, notice under section 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee on 31.03.2021 in response to which the assessee filed its return of income for both the AYs under consideration on 28.04.2021 declaring income of Rs. Nil. Thereafter statutory notices were issued

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -3 vs. TELSTRA SINGAPORE PTE LTD.

ITA/206/2023HC Delhi24 Jul 2024

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 9

section 9(1)(vi) of the Act brought into force by the Finance Act, 2012 are applicable to domestic laws and the said amended definition cannot be extended to DTAA, where the term has been defined originally and not amended." xxxx xxxx xxxx 26. In view of the above said facts, we hold that there is no merit

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -3 vs. TELSTRA SINGAPORE PTE LTD.

ITA/334/2022HC Delhi24 Jul 2024

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 9

section 9(1)(vi) of the Act brought into force by the Finance Act, 2012 are applicable to domestic laws and the said amended definition cannot be extended to DTAA, where the term has been defined originally and not amended." xxxx xxxx xxxx 26. In view of the above said facts, we hold that there is no merit