AMBUJA CEMENTS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT LTU, MUMBAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that dividend distribution tax under Section 115-O is on the domestic company, not the shareholder. Therefore, the DTAA rate for the shareholder is not applicable to this tax.
What were the facts?
The assessee raised additional grounds of appeal concerning the benefit of Article 10 of the India-Mauritius DTAA for dividend distribution tax. The ITAT had previously recalled its earlier order to adjudicate these additional grounds.
What were the issues?
Whether the benefit of the India-Mauritius DTAA applies to dividend distribution tax levied on the domestic company.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “K” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH
O R D E R PER BENCH : These two appeals filed by the assessee were adjudicated vide combined order of the vide ITAT No. 2968/Mum/2015 and 1665/Mum/2019 on 07.11.2022. 2. Thereafter the assessee filed miscellaneous application vide MA no. 381/Mum/2022 and MA 382/Mum/2022 and submitted that additional grounds raised vide separate application dated 05.01.2018 was remained to the adjudicated by the Tribunal in the above referred order dated 07.11.2022.
P a g e | 2 AMBUJA CEMENT LTD. VS ACIT ITA No. 6375/Mum/2
The ITAT vide order dated 28.02.2023 has allowed the miscellaneous application filed by the assessee and recalled the order dated 07.11.2022 to the limited extent of adjudication of additional grounds raised
by the assessee vide application dated 05.01.2018.
4. The additional grounds of appeal filed by the assessee are adjudicated as follow. The assessee has raised the following additional grounds of appeal. “The following ground is independent of, and without prejudice to previsous grounds,
1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the Appellant ought to be granted the benefit of Article 10 of the India Mauritius Double Tax Avoidance Agreement, that the dividend declared by the appellant to Holderind Investment Ltd., Manutius is liable to dividend distribution tax at the rate of 5 percent. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or withdraw all or any of the grounds of appeal at or before the time of hearing.
5. The additional grounds of appeal of the assessee is pertained to the applicability of dividend distribution tax at the rate of 5% to the dividend declared by the assessee to Holderind Investment Ltd., Mauritius and the assessee sought the benefit of article 10 of the India-Mauritius Double Tax Avoidance Agreement. At the outset Ld Counsel agreed that identical issue and similar facts has been decided by the Special Bench of ITAT Mumbai in the case of DCIT v/s Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. vide dated 20.04.2023 wherein held that additional grounds income tax payable by the domestic company shall be at the rate of mentioned in section 115-O of the Act.
5. With the assistance of Ld representative, we have been gone through the decision of ITAT special bench Mumbai as referred supra in the case of DCIT v/s Total India Pvt. Ltd. ITA no. 6997/Mum/2019 wherein it is held that the dividend declared, distributed or paid by a domestic company to non resident shareholder (s) attract additional income tax (tax on distributed profits) referred to in section 115-O of the Act, such additional income tax payable by the domestic company P a g e | 3 AMBUJA CEMENT LTD. VS ACIT ITA No. 6375/Mum/2 115-O of the Act and not at the rate of tax applicable to the non resident shareholder(s) as specified in the relevant DTAA with reference to such dividend income. Following the decision of the Special Bench as (supra) the dividend distribution tax is not on the shareholder but a tax on the domestic company. It is a tax on the company distributing the dividend and not tax paid on behalf of the shareholder. Therefore, following the decision of Special Bench as (supra) both the additional grounds of appeal are dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 31.05.2023
More judgments on Section 115-O
- Wpp Media India Private Limited, Mumbai vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 9297/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: Disposed17 Sept 2026AY 2013-14
- DCIT, Circle 1(3)(1), Mumbai vs Group M Media India Private Limited, MumbaiITA 9197/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: Disposed17 Sept 2026AY 2016-17
- Ucb India Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs Addl/ ACIT/ Jt/ Dy/ NFAC, MumbaiITA 905/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: Disposed31 Aug 2026AY 2016-17
- Interactive Television Private Limited… vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 4862/MUM/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2026AY 2020-21
- Denso Haryana Private Limited, New Delhi vs JCIT, Special Range 3, New DelhiITA 1250/DEL/2023[2013-14]Status: Disposed28 Jul 2026AY 2013-14
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Giri Paints vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Madras · 15 Oct 2026
- Rahul Radheshyam Chauhan vs. Union Of INDIA Thru The Sec. Ministry Of Law And Justice And OrsBombay · 15 Oct 2026
- S.Murugesan vs. The Deputy Commercial Tax OfficerMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Annai Garden vs. The Commercial Tax Officer / The State Tax OfficerMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Yadeshwar Mallekedi vs. The State Of TelanganaTelangana · 15 Oct 2026