Skip to content


Latest Cases Home > Latest Court: authority for advance rulings Page 11 of about 283 results (0.179 seconds)

Nov 27 2006 (TRI)

international Hotel Licensing Company S.A.R.L. Vs. Dit (international ...

Court : Authority for Advance Rulings

Justice Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri M/s International Hotel Licensing Company, SARL (referred to in this ruling as the applicant), filed this application under section 245Q(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act). The applicant, a non-resident company, is a subsidiary of International Hotel Licensing Company Investments SARL which is a Luxembourg company. The applicant is in the business ofpromoting enterprises and is conducting international advertising, marketing and sales programs# for Marriott chain of hotels to promote them in the foreign markets. Marriott is a leading worldwide hospitality group. In 2005 different Marriott group entities entered into various agreements with Unitech Hospitality Ltd., an Indian company, (referred to in this ruling as "the owner") in connection with the setting up of an Indian hotel to be constructed, furnished and equipped in Noida (Uttar Pradesh), India. The applicant also entered into an agreement with the Owner called "International Ma...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 09 2006 (TRI)

ijm (India) Infrastructure Vs. Commissioner of Service Tax

Court : Authority for Advance Rulings

Reported in : (2007)5STR314

Appellants: IJM (India) Infrastructure Limited Vs.For Respondents/Defendant: A.K. Roy, Joint CDR and Bipin Sapra, Additional Commissioner Service Tax Finance Act, 1994 - Sections 65(25), 65(105), 96A and 96C; Companies Act - Sections 3(1), 4, 4(1), 4(3) and 4(7); Income Tax Act, 1961 - Section 2 1. The applicant, in this application under Section 96C of the Finance Act, 1994 (referred to in this order as "the Service Tax Act"), claims to be a wholly owned subsidiary of M/s IJM Corporation, Berhad, a foreign company incorporated in Malaysia (for short "the holding company"). It is stated that the holding company is having 97.31% of paid up equity of the applicant. The holding company was awarded the contract of Civic Centre construction work at Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, Minto Road, New Delhi by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD). The holding company has sub-contracted the work of Civic Centre construction to the applicant. In the application against column 6, it is stated that the ...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 08 2006 (TRI)

In Re: British Gas India P. Ltd.

Court : Authority for Advance Rulings

Reported in : (2006)206CTRAAR385

Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri, J. (Chairman), A.S. Narang and A. Sinha, Members 1. The present application has been filed under Section 245Q of the Income-tax Act 1961 (for short "the Act"), by the British Gas India Private Limited, Gurgaon (for short "the applicant"), a company which is registered in India under the Companies Act, 1956. Though the applicant itself is a resident in India within the meaning of Section 6 of the Act, it has raised certain issues relating to the tax liability of some of its non-resident employees lent to group companies abroad.The applicant has sought advance ruling of this Authority on the following questions: (i) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, salary income received in India by Mr. Manish Gupta from British Gas India Private Limited for rendering services outside India is taxable in India? (ii) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, British Gas India Private Limited is required to withhold taxes on sal...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 08 2006 (TRI)

In Re: Ms. Meenu Sahi Mamik

Court : Authority for Advance Rulings

Reported in : (2006)206CTRAAR396

Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri, J. (Chairman), A.S. Narang and A. Sinha, Members o Advance ruling--Maintainability of applicationAssessee-firm was not non-resident as per Act--Partner of assesee-firm was resident of Netherlands. It filed application under section 246Q(1) seeking ruling of authority as to entitlement of exemption under section 80-IC against direct business procured by it and exemption of processing charges received by assessee-firm from Bayer Health Care Pharmaceuticals in India. Held: Partnership deed was not registered and it was not mentioned whether partners and witnesses signed it in India or Netherlands. The deed was silent about the place where HO of the firm was to be located. The requirement of the Act is that control and management of affairs should be situated wholly outside India, of a firm situated in India, that claims status of |non-resident|. Since de facto control and management of affairs of assessee-firm would be with resident partner in India, the firm c...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 08 2006 (TRI)

Ms. Meenu Sahi Mamik Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax –ii, Chandiga ...

Court : Authority for Advance Rulings

Mr. A.S. Narang Ms. Meenu Sahi Mamik a resident of Amsterdam, Netherlands has filed an application under section 245Q(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short the Act) on March 10, 2006 in Form No.34C (meant for non-resident applicants). The applicant wants to establish a manufacturing facility for the formulation of pharmaceuticals in partnership with one of her family members in the state of Himachal Pradesh, India to avail of the tax holiday under section 80-IC of the Act. The Central Government has declared Income Tax Holiday for a 10 years period for industrial undertakings in the state of Himachal Pradesh. The proposed industrial unit would be an integrated unit and would exist as a viable unit. Bayer Health Care Pharmaceuticals (for short Bayer Health) proposes to have their products manufactured at the proposed unit by outsourcing the production but under their own direct supervision, license and control, for which Bayer Health would pay negotiated processing charges to the f...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 06 2006 (TRI)

In Re: A.T. and S. India P. Ltd.

Court : Authority for Advance Rulings

Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri, J. (Chairman), A.S. Narang and A. Sinha, Members 1. This application under Section 245Q(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act"), is by an Indian residentAT&S India Limited (hereinafter referred to as "the applicant"). The applicant is a subsidiary of AT&S Austria Technologie and Systemtechnik Aktiengesellschaft, Austria (for short "the AT&S Austria"), a company incorporated under the laws of the Republic of Austria. The applicant is carrying on the business of manufacturing of printed circuit boards.The applicant entered into various agreements with AT&S Austria. It entered into an agreement for information technology cost sharing with AT&S Austria on March 13, 2001a fact which is not relevant any more for the present discussion. Among others, two agreements which are material here are the foreign collaboration agreement dated August 17, 2000, and the secondment agreement dated September 17, 2002. Pursuant to the latter agree...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 06 2006 (TRI)

In Re: Imt Labs (India) (P) Ltd.

Court : Authority for Advance Rulings

Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri, J. (Chairman), A.S. Narang and A. Sinha, Members Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 4, 7, 9, 9(1), 44BB, 195, 195(1), 195(2), 195(3), 197 and 245Q(1); Copyright Act, 1957 - Section 14; Copyright Act, 1976 - Section 106Transmission Corporation of A.P. Ltd. v. CIT (1999) 155 CTR (SC) 489 : (1999) 239 ITR 587 (SC); In Re: Dun and Bradstreet Espana, S.A. (2005) 193 CTR (AAR) 9 : (2005) 272 ITR 99 (AAR) 1. In this case an application under Section 245Q(1) of the IT Act, 1961 (for short the Act), has been filed on 30th Dec, 2005 in Form No.34D (meant for resident applicants), seeking ruling with regard to the tax liability of a non-resident arising out of a transaction with a resident. The applicant IMT Lab (India) (P) Ltd. (for short IMT India) having its registered office at C-1/113. Janakpuri, New Delhi has entered into an agreement with a non-resident company, Conversagent Inc. a Delaware Corporation, New York, USA (for short Conversagent) and secured license of ...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 06 2006 (TRI)

In Re: Imt Labs (India) P. Ltd.

Court : Authority for Advance Rulings

Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri, J. (Chairman), A.S. Narang and A. Sinha, Members 1. In this case an application under Section 245Q(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act"), has been filed on December 30, 2005, in Form No. 34D (meant for resident applicants), seeking ruling with regard to the tax liability of a non-resident arising out of a transaction with a resident. The applicant IMT Lab (India) Pvt. Ltd. (for short "IMT India") having its registered office at C-1/113, Janak Puri, New Delhi, has entered into an agreement with a non-resident company, Con-versagent Inc., a Delaware Corporation, New York, USA (for short Con-versagent) and secured licence of a particular software, which the applicant is entitled to use. The applicant has to pay licence fee for the software to the said non-resident company. It has been categorically stated by the applicant that "Conversagent", the non-resident company does not have any establishment or office in India, and therefore, the payments ...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 06 2006 (TRI)

In Re: at and S India (P) Ltd.

Court : Authority for Advance Rulings

Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri, J. (Chairman), A.S. Narang and A. Sinha, Members Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 9, 9(1), 195, 195(1), 195(2), 195(3), 197 and 245Q(1)Transmission Corporation of A.P. Ltd. v. CIT (1999) 155 CTR (SC) 489 : (1999) 239 ITR 587 (SC) 1. This application under Section 245Q(1) of the IT Act, 1961 (for short "the Act") is by an Indian resident--AT&S India Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "the applicant"). The applicant is a subsidiary of AT&S Austria Technologie & Systemtechnik Aktiengesellschaft, Austria (for short "the AT&S Austria"), a company incorporated under the laws of Republic of Austria. The applicant is carrying on the business of manufacturing of printed circuit boards. The applicant entered into various agreements with AT&S Austria. It entered into an agreement for information technology cost sharing with AT&S Austria on 13th March, 2001 a fact which is not relevant any more for the present discussion.Among others, two agreements...

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 30 2006 (TRI)

In Re: Angel Garment Ltd.

Court : Authority for Advance Rulings

Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri, J. (Chairman), A.S. Narang and A. Sinha, Members o Income deemed to accrue or arise in India--Under Section 9(1)(i)Non-resident company--Assessee, a Hong Kong based company and non-resident as per provisions of Section 6(3), proposed to set up a liaison office in India for carrying out activities of collecting informations and communicating the same to its HO at Hong Kong and to follow-up with Indian exporters for timely export of goods ordered by assessee-company. The entire expenses of the proposed liaison office was to be met through remittance from assessee|s HO. Assessee sought advance ruling of authority on the question as to whether assessee could be held to have earned any income taxable in India as per IT Act, 1961. Held: The proposed activities of liaison office were confined to purchase of goods for the purpose of export. It was immaterial whether the export of goods was to Hong Kong or to any other country because Clause (b) of the Explanation 1 ...

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //