AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) 
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter. 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (1) TMI 426
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....3, W. P. (C) 9482/2023 - -<br>Income Tax<br>HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA W.P.(C) 15928/2023 & CM APPL. 64160-64161/2023, W.P.(C) 7021/2023 & CM APPL. 27339/2023, W.P.(C) 7543/2023 & CM APPL. 29234/2023, W.P.(C) 7836/2023 & CM APPL. 30212/2023, W.P.(C) 7859/2023 & CM APPL. 30293/2023, W.P.(C) 9482/2023 & CM APPL. 36223/2023, W.P.(C) 9493/2023 & CM APPL. 36254/2023, W.P.(C) 11331/2023 For the Petitioner Through: Mr. Ved Jain, Ms. Nischay Kantoor, Ms. Soniya Dodeja, Advocates, Mr. Salil Kapoor, Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Mr. Sumit Lalchandani, Mr. Vibhu Jain, Advocates, Mr. Kamal Sawhney, Mr. Nikhil Agarwal, Mr. Nishank Vashishtha, Mr. Puru Medhira, Advocates, Mr. Tarun Gulati, Sr. Advocate with Ms.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Ors. being W.P.(C) 15928/2023 are mentioned, namely, that the petitioner is a foreign company and is a resident of Italy. Learned counsel for petitioner states that during FY 2018-19, the petitioner had subscribed to 15,00,000 shares at face value of Rs. 10 each by making foreign inward remittance of Rs. 1,50,00,000 in its wholly owned Indian subsidiary namely, Angelantoni Test Technologies India Pvt. Ltd. in accordance with applicable regulations. He further states that since the Petitioner had not earned any income from any source in India, the Petitioner did not file return of income in India. 3. Learned counsel for the Petitioners submit that the transactions in question are capital account transactions which are incapable of generat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....res in an Indian subsidiary cannot be treated as 'income' as the same is in the nature of "capital account transaction" not giving rise to any income. In Nestle SA Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (W.P.(C) No. 12643/2018), this Court held that the allegation of the Revenue that the investment in the shares of Indian subsidiary amounted to 'income' is flawed. The relevant portion of the said judgment is reproduced hereinunder: "24. The principal objection of the Petitioner that its investment in the shares of its subsidiary cannot be treated as 'income' is well founded. The decision of the Bombay High Court in Vodafone India Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India (supra) holding such investment in shares to be a 'capital ac....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....said press note is reproduced hereinbelow: "Acceptance of the Order of the High Court of Bombay in the case of Vodafone India Services Private Limited The Union Cabinet, chaired by the Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi, in a major decision, has decided to accept the order of the High Court of Bombay in the case of Vodafone India Services Private Limited (VISPL) dated 10.10.2014. This is a major correction of a tax matter which has adversely affected investor sentiment. Based on the opinion of Chief Commissioner of Income-tax (International Taxation), Chairperson (CBDT) and the Attorney General of India, the Cabinet decided to: i. accept the order of the High Court of Bombay in WP No. 871 of 2014, dated 10.10.2014;....