Month: March 2020

Archive for March, 2020


CIT v. Mphasis Ltd. (2016) 74 taxmann.com 274 (Karn.)(HC) Editorial : SLP of revenue is dismissed; CIT v. Mphasis Ltd. (2020) 269 Taxman 3 (SC)

S. 10B : Export oriented undertakings-Total turnover-Foreign currency expenditure incurred for providing software development services outside India cannot be excluded from export turnover for purpose of computing deduction-When expenditure incurred in foreign currency on account of telecommunication expenses is excluded from export turnover, said expenditure has to be excluded from total turnover also for purpose of computation of deduction. [S. 80HHC, 80HHE ]

Gujarat Rajya Kamdar Sabha Union Machiwadi v. ITO (2020) 421 ITR 341/312 CTR 313 / 185 DTR 336(Guj.)(HC)

S. 10(24) : Association of trade unions-Amount received on settlement of dispute between company and its workers-Amount disbursed to workers-Amount not assessable in hands of trade union.

Infineon Technologies (P) Ltd. v. Dy.CIT (2019) 112 taxmann.com 401 / 269 Taxman 53 (Karn.)(HC) Editorial: SLP is granted to the assessee Infineon Technologies (P) Ltd v. Dy. CIT (2020) 269 Taxman 52 (SC)

S. 9(1)(vi) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Royalty Payments made for import of software for imparting of information concerning technical industrial commercial or scientific knowledge etc-Assessable as royalty-Liable to deduct tax at source. [S. 9(1)(vii), 195]

Nippon Steel Engineering Co. Ltd. (2020) 269 Taxman 243 / ( 2019) 112 taxmann.com 132 (AAR)

S. 9(1)(i) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Business connection-Amount received/receivable by applicant under equipment supply contract awarded by an Indian company for off shore supply of Coke Dry Quenching (CDQ) units would not be chargeable to tax in India-DTAA-India-Japan. [Art. 7]

Hitachi High Technologies Singapore Pte Ltd. (2019) 202 TTJ 273 / (2020) 180 ITD 861/ 187 DTR 223 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 9(1)(i) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Business connection-Liaison office-Involved in preparatory and auxiliary activities but also involved in ascertaining customer requirements, price negotiations obtaining of purchase orders etc- Constituted PE in India and profit attribution has to be done-DTAA-India-Singapore. [S. 92, Art. 5]

CIT(IT) v. Nortel Network Singapore (Pte) Ltd. (2019) 111 taxmann.com 222 (Delhi) (HC) Editorial: SLP is granted to the revenue; CIT(IT) v. Nortel Network Singapore (Pte) Ltd. (2019) 111 taxmann.com 222 / 269 Taxman 23 (SC)

S. 9(1)(i) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Business connection-Supervisory activities should be more than 183 days in a fiscal year-No part of income from transaction is assessable in India-DTAA-India-Singapore. [Art. 5, 12]

EOS GmbH-India Branch v. Dy.CIT (IT) (2020) 420 ITR 119 /269 Taxman 223/ 187 DTR 22 2/ 313 CTR 755(Mad.)(HC)

S. 9(1)(i) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Business connection-Challenging the show cause notice seeking to tax entire income earned by its parent German Company in India-Factual issues are involved-Directed to file objection before DRP- Matter remanded. [S. 144C, Art. 226]

PCIT v. Rohan Projects (2020) 269 Taxman 212 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 5 : Scope of total income–Accrual of income–Time of accrual-Year of taxability-Developer of land-Part of sale consideration was payable by purchaser on completion of assessee’s obligation under MOU-Not liable to tax relevant assessment year. [S. 4, 145]

PCIT v. H. P. Excise And Taxation Technical Service Agency. (2020) 113 taxmann.com 86 / 269 Taxman 21 (HP)(HC) Editorial : SLP of revenue is dismissed ; PCIT v. H. P. Excise And Taxation Technical Service Agency. (2020) 269 Taxman 20 (SC)

S. 4 : Charge of income-tax–Amount paid to Government as per bye-laws of assessee-society–Held to be not taxable, even though assessee was not registered under section 12AA nor its income was exempt under any of provisions of Act. [S. 12AA]

DDIT v. Ramesh Dang (2020) 269 Taxman 110 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 2(28) : Inspector of Income-tax-Service matters-Technical Assistant-Equal pay scale-In absence of any recommendations of an expert body like Central Pay Commission or Anomalies Committee, CAT could not grant parity in pay scales-Order of CAT is set aside. [Art.226, 227]