Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Amadeus IT Group SA v. ACIT (2022) 197 ITD 330 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 9(1)(i) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Business connection-Permanent Establishment-Agency PE-Computer information system (CRS)-Computer, electronic hardware / software and connectivity is provided through third party nodes located in India-Constitute PE of and income arising from airlines and travel agents is attributable to activities of PE in India and taxable in India-Income attributable to assessee’s PE in India was to be determined at 15 per cent instead of 75 per cent as determined by AO.-Royalties / Fees for technical services-CRS and ARS was installed at airport which could be accessed only by airlines, payments made in relation to ARS could not be characterised as royalty either under section 9 or under India-Spain DTAA-DTAA-India-Spain. [S. 9(1)(vi), 9(1)(vii), Art. 5, 13]

ITO(IT) v. International Reinsurance and Insurance Consultancy & Broking Services (P.) Ltd. (2022) 197 ITD 198 / (2023) 222 TTJ 515 / 224 DTR 29 (Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 9(1)(i) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Business connection-Brokerage income from NRRs and did not work wholly and exclusively for co-broker, assessee was not dependent agent permanent establishment of said co-broker in India-Not dependent agent permanent establishment of said co-broker in India-DTAA-India-Singapore. [S. 195, Art. 5, 7]

ACIT(IT) v. Credit Suisse AG. (2022) 197 ITD 209 (Mum.) (Trib.)

S. 9(1)(i) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Business connection-Dubai branch-Referral fee-Swiss company received fee from an Indian company for referring an Indian resident client for bringing out issue of convertible bonds-Fee is in nature of commission to be taxed as business income and not as fees for technical services-Fee not attributable PE in India the same is not taxable in India-DTAA-India-Switzerland. [S. 9(1)(vii), Art. 7, 12]

Prabhukumar Aiyappa Kullatira v. ITO [2022] 197 ITD 58/(2023) 224 TTJ 252 (Bang.) (Trib.)

S. 5 : Scope of total income-Resident in India-Long term capital gains-Shares held in UAE based company-Taxable as per the provisions of Indian Income-tax and not as per article 13 of DTAA-DTAA-India-UAE. [S. 6(1), 9(1), Art. 13]

ACIT v. Anilkumar Phoolchand Sanghvi (2022) 197 ITD 439 (Pune)(Trib.)

S. 2(22)(e) : Deemed dividend-Fixed deposit-Fiduciary capacity-Protect the interest of company-Addition cannot be made as deemed dividend.

Pallava Resorts (P.) Ltd. v. ITO (2022) 197 ITD 411 (Chennai) (Trib.)

S. 2(22)(e) : Deemed dividend-Not a share holder of holding company-Not taxable as deemed dividend irrespective of their common shareholders.

Jai Singh Goel v. CCIT . (2022) 325 CTR 485 / 211 DTR 293 (Delhi)( HC)

S. 279 : Offences and prosecutions – Sanction – Chief Commissioner – Commissioner – Application for compounding of offence – Rejected on the ground of limitation and the fact that assessee was already convicted by Magistrate – Conviction order set aside by CBI Judge and directed a fresh trial – High Court sets aside rejection of compounding application as (i) CBDT Circular had relaxed time limit to file a such application and (ii) second objection no longer survives as the conviction set aside – Revenue to consider the application seeking compounding on its own merit and in accordance with law [ S. 119 , 276CC, 278E, Art , 226 , CRPC , 391 ]

Elavally Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT(A) ( 2022) 213 DTR 453 / 326 CTR 860 (Ker)( HC)

S. 271B :Penalty- Failure to get accounts audited – Stay – Technical glitches Natural justice- Advancement in technology cannot hamper the cause of justice -Directed not to take coercive action [ S. 246A Art , 226 ]

PCIT v. J. M. J. Essential Oil Company (2022) 216 DTR 273/ 327 CTR 721 (Orissa HC)

S.271(1)(c): Penalty – Concealment – Mere acceptance of sales figures by VAT Authority cannot be a sufficient ground to hold that the cash sales were in fact genuine so as to delete the levy of penalty . [ S.80IC ]

CIT v. Maharashtra Seamless Ltd. (2022) 220 DTR 415/329 CTR 937 (SC) CIT v. Air France ( 2022) 220 DTR 416 (SC )/ (2023) 330 CTR 110 /CIT v. British Airways (2022 ) 220 DTR 416 / 2023) 330 CTR 110( SC)

S. 268A : Appeal –Instructions – Monetary limit less than Rs 2 Crores – Appeal of revenue was dismissed .