PHILIPS INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 11(1),, KOLKATA

ITA 1780/KOL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 March 2026AY 2012-2013Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA (Judicial Member), SHRI RAKESH MISHRA (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that DDT is a charge on the profits of the company distributed as dividend and not a tax on the shareholder, thus the DTAA is not triggered. Furthermore, the assessee failed to file a return of income as required under Section 239(1) of the Income Tax Act for claiming the refund.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Philips India Limited, a subsidiary of Philips Netherlands, paid Dividend Distribution Tax (DDT) on dividends declared to its Dutch parent company. The assessee claimed a refund of excess DDT paid, citing the India-Netherlands Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA).

What were the issues?

Whether Dividend Distribution Tax (DDT) is covered under the DTAA provisions, and whether a refund claim for excess DDT is maintainable without filing a return of income.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 115-O,Section 237,Section 154,Section 244A,Section 139,Section 239

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)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, KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH AT KOLKATA

Before: SHRI SONJOY SARMA & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA

PER BENCH: All these appeals filed by the assessee are against the separate orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'CIT(A)'] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for AYs 2008-09 to 2014-15 dated 29.06.2024 and 28.06.2024 for AY 2015-16. 1.1 Since the issues are common, all the appeals were heard together and are being decided vide this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity.

2.

The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal for AY 2008-09 and more or less similar grounds of appeal have been raised in the appeals

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 →