3i Infotech Ltd. vs ACIT, CIT and UOI
Validity of: Re-asstt.-No failure to disclose material facts-AY 2002-2003. In original asstt the amount paid to subsidiary was allowed after enquiry as business expenditure. Similarly, was the position of intere [LexDoc Id : 389575]
Cartier Shipping Co. Ltd. vs DDIT
Validity of: Re-asstt.-Non-disclosure of certain income-Since the capital gains accruing in India were not shown in the original return, the notice under s.148 was valid.
S.147 and s.148 of the Income [LexDoc Id : 392276]
ITAT (Mumbai)
2010
DCIT vs Indo-American Jewellery Ltd.
Arms Length Price-Higher rate of tax in foreign country-AY 2004-2005. The assessee was exporting jewellery to its AEs. It showed operating profits at 3.56% on sales and 3.70% on cost while in comparable cas [LexDoc Id : 391872]
ITAT (Mumbai)
2010
Airlines Rotables Ltd. vs JDIT
Income deemed to accrue in India-Permanent Establishment v. Storage of spares as bailee-AY 1998-1999. The assessee was a company of U.K. Under an agreement with 'JET' it provided repairs and replacement of aircraft components. The replace [LexDoc Id : 393237]
ITAT (Mumbai)
2010
Ashapura Minichem Ltd. vs ADIT
Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Technical services used in India-AY 2008-2009. Where technical services are rendered abroad but used in India, the income of the non-resident accrue in India. It in no longer necessar [LexDoc Id : 392357]
DDIT vs Nederlandsche Overzee Baggermaatsehappiji bv
Income deemed to accrue in India-Royalty v. Bare boat Charges-AY 1999-2000 to 2002-2003. As per Art.12 of the DTAA with Netherland the receipt of bareboat charges i.e. rent for use of equipment, could not be taxe [LexDoc Id : 394984]
ITAT (Mumbai)
2010
Reliance Energy Ltd. and Reliance Energy Centre vs DCIT
Special deduction- Arms Length Price-[ALP]-No transaction with stranger-AY 2001-2002 and 2003-2004. The assessee had a captive power plant. There was no sale of power to any other person. S.80-IA(10) was not applicable. LexDoc Id : 390371]
Grasim Industries Ltd. and Ors. vs CIT and Ors.
Income deemed to accrue in India-Know - how etc. delivered abroad-The Indian Company wanted to set up a sponge iron plant. The US Company agreed to provide Know - how etc to it abroad. No income to US company arose i [LexDoc Id : 408932]
DCIT vs Stratex Networks India (P) Ltd.
Computation of: ALP-Inclusion of domestic receipts-AY 2004-2005. The assessee was a 100% subsidiary of a company of Mauritius, and was engaged in telecommunication contracts. While determining PLI- Pro [LexDoc Id : 397903]
Prudential Assurance Co. Ltd. vs DIT
Validity of : Revision by CIT and Writ-AO following the binding ruling of AAR-The AO had made the assessment consistent with the binding ruling of the AAR. The CIT could not set aside the AO's order on the ground that the AAR in [LexDoc Id : 387748]
HC (Bombay)
2010
Mckinsey and Co. Inc. vs UOI and Ors.
Duty of AO-Rule of consistency-Issuing certificate under s.197-AY 2008-2009. When the assessee made an application under s.197 for ‘nil' or lower rate of TDS, the AO was bound to follow the CIT's order under s.264 [LexDoc Id : 392526]
HC (Bombay)
2010
ITO vs Zydus Altana Healthcare (P) Ltd.
Arm's length price-Clinical Trial Services-AY 2002-2003 and 2003-2004. The assessee was a joint venture between BYK and CHL. It performed clinical trial services for BYK which was a German Comp [LexDoc Id : 406303]
DCIT vs Starlite
Arms Length Price in International transactions-Transactions Net Margin Method-AY 2002-2003. It was necessary for the assessee to follow any one prescribed method to shown that its transaction was at arm's length price. The Trans [LexDoc Id : 392112]
