Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        Note

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Foreign travel expenses allowed under section 37(1) as disallowance violated unilateral APA terms with CBDT</h1> <h3>The Dy. CIT Circle-1 (1) Chandigarh Versus M/s Fidelity Information Services India Pvt. Ltd. And M/s Fidelity Information Services India Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Dy. CIT Circle-1 (1), Chandigarh</h3> The Dy. CIT Circle-1 (1) Chandigarh Versus M/s Fidelity Information Services India Pvt. Ltd. And M/s Fidelity Information Services India Pvt. Ltd. Versus ... Issues Involved:1. Deletion of addition of foreign travel expenses under Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act.2. Levy of interest under Sections 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act on additional income assessed pursuant to the Advance Pricing Agreement (APA).Detailed Analysis:1. Deletion of Addition of Foreign Travel Expenses:The primary issue in the Revenue's appeal was the deletion of the addition of Rs. 9,21,58,400/- related to foreign travel expenses, which the Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed under Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act. The AO argued that the expenses were not the responsibility of the assessee company but were related to its US-based counterparts, M/s SF Inc. USA and Fidelity Information Services Inc. USA. The AO maintained that the foreign travel expenses were not incurred in the ordinary course of business and were not reimbursed by the foreign clients as claimed by the assessee. The AO further noted that similar disallowances were upheld in previous assessment years.The assessee contended that the foreign travel expenses were incurred for providing on-site software development services to its associated enterprises (AEs) and were reimbursed on a cost-plus 15% basis, as per the service agreements. The assessee provided detailed evidence, including employee-wise travel details and confirmations from customers, to substantiate its claim.The CIT(A) deleted the disallowance, following the decision of the Coordinate Bench for earlier years (A.Y. 2011-12 and 2012-13), which had ruled in favor of the assessee. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, noting that the foreign travel expenses were part of the cost on which a markup was charged to the AEs, and thus, were incurred wholly for business purposes under Section 37(1). The Tribunal found that the assessee had demonstrated the recovery of these expenses from its AEs, and the APA with the CBDT confirmed the cost-plus markup arrangement.2. Levy of Interest under Sections 234B and 234C:The assessee filed a cross-objection challenging the levy of interest under Sections 234B and 234C on additional income assessed pursuant to the APA. The assessee argued that the interest should not be levied as the additional income was determined after the close of the financial year, making it impossible to estimate and pay advance tax on it. The assessee cited a recent decision by the Delhi Tribunal, which supported its position.The Tribunal, however, dismissed the cross-objection. It noted that the assessee had already computed and paid interest under Sections 234B and 234C in its modified return of income filed pursuant to the APA. The Tribunal emphasized that the levy of interest is consequential and arises due to the shortfall in advance tax payment compared to the assessed tax. It held that even if the additional income was determined post the financial year, it still formed part of the assessed tax, and the assessee was liable to pay interest on the shortfall. The Tribunal distinguished the case from those where there was a complete failure to pay advance tax, noting that the assessee had paid a substantial amount as advance tax.In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s order on the deletion of foreign travel expenses and dismissed the assessee's cross-objection regarding interest levy, thereby dismissing both the Revenue's appeal and the assessee's cross-objection.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found