POLYCAB INDIA LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 5(2), MUMBAI

ITA 4671/MUM/2023Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 June 2025AY 2020-21Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)15 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the dividend paid to IFC should be reduced from the total dividend amount for the purpose of calculating DDT. This is because IFC enjoys statutory immunity from taxation in India, and levying DDT indirectly on the dividend disbursing company would violate this legislative intent.

What were the facts?

The assessee company claimed a refund of Dividend Distribution Tax (DDT) paid on dividends distributed to the International Finance Corporation (IFC). IFC, a shareholder, claimed immunity from taxation in India under the International Finance Corporation Act, 1958.

What were the issues?

Whether Dividend Distribution Tax (DDT) is leviable on dividends paid to an entity like IFC which enjoys statutory immunity from taxation in India, and if so, whether the amount paid to such an entity should be reduced from the dividend amount subject to DDT.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 115-O,Section 9,Section 237

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH

Before: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora & Shri, Shri Lekh Mehta
For Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR
Hearing: 12/06/2025Pronounced: 16/06/2025

PER AMIT SHUKLA (J.M): The aforesaid appeals have been filed by the assessee against separate impugned orders of consolidated dated 23/10/2023 passed by ld. CIT (A)-53, Mumbai in relation to order passed u/s. 237 of the Act for the A.Yrs.2018-19, 2019-20 and 2020-21. 2. Since issues involved in all the appeals are common, therefore, same have been disposed of by way of this consolidated order.

3.

In all the appeals, the common grounds raised are as under:- 1. erred in confirming the action of the AO in rejecting refund claimed by Appellant in respect of the dividend distribution tax (DDT)

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 115-O

All 331 judgments and leading authorities on Section 115-O →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →