BOBST BIELEFELD GMBH,GERMANY vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INT TAX CIRCLE 1(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

ITA 6030/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 February 2026AY 2018-19Bench: JUSTICE (RETD.) SHRI C.V. BHADANG (President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the AO failed to examine the assessee's claim for beneficial tax rate under the India-Germany tax treaty. The AO also incorrectly allowed relief under Section 91, which is not applicable to non-residents with Indian-sourced income.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a German company, provided technical services to Indian clients and earned income. It initially offered this income under 'business and profession' in its return, seeking a beneficial tax rate under the India-Germany tax treaty. The Assessing Officer (AO) taxed the income at a higher rate and incorrectly allowed relief under Section 91.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee is eligible for the beneficial tax rate under the India-Germany tax treaty for technical services income, and the AO's incorrect application of Section 91 relief.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 90,Section 91,Section 143(3),Section 234A,Section 234B,Section 234C,Section 270A

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, MUMBAI “I” BENCH : MUMBAI

Before: JUSTICE (RETD.) SHRI C.V. BHADANG & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV

PER VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M : These two appeals are filed by the assessee against the respective orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-55, Mumbai [„Ld.CIT(A)‟], both dated 15-07-2025, pertaining to Assessment Years (AYs.) 2017-18 & 2018-19, wherein the assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal: Grounds of appeal (AY. 2017-18):

1.

Ground No. 1 - General On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the assessm

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 90

All 1,075 judgments and leading authorities on Section 90 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →