DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. EXPRO GULF LIMITED, CYPRUS
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that interest income on income tax refunds arising to a foreign company under Section 244A of the Act is taxable at the maximum marginal rate. This decision was based on respectfully following previous judicial precedents.
What were the facts?
The Revenue appealed against an order concerning the taxability of interest income on an income tax refund earned by a foreign company under Section 244A of the Income Tax Act. The core issue was whether this interest income should be taxed at the maximum marginal rate.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was whether interest income on income tax refunds received by a foreign company is taxable at the maximum marginal rate.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(3)Show listHide 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.
- ACIT v. Clough Engineering Ltd.29 citing138 TTJ 385 · 2011 · ITAT
- Middle East Ltd. v. Asst Commissioner11 citing380 ITR 138 · 2016 · HC
- 29 SOT 3128 citing29 SOT 312 · ITAT
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI
1. The captioned appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-, Noida-2 [‘Ld. CIT(A)’ for short] dated 31/10/2023 pertaining to Assessment Year 2017-18.
The solitary issue involved in the captioned Appeal is as to whether interest income on income tax refund earned u/s 244A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) deserves to be chargeable to tax on maximum marginal rate of 40% or not.
The above issueinvolved in the present Appeal is no more res- integra. The Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Schlumberger Asia Services Ltd, Vs. DCIT in vide order dated 15/09/2023 relying on the Judgment of Jurisdictional High Court, held as under:-
“10.9. The ld. AR had stated that the decision of Delhi Tribunal in the case of B J Services Co. Middle East reported in [200] 29 SOT 312 (Delhi) has decided the issue in favour of the revenue. But this decision has been considered by the Special Bench of Delhi Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs Clough Engineering Ltd reported in 138 TTJ 385 (Delhi)(SB). We have gone through the decision of Special Bench and we find in that case, the issue was concerned with taxability under treaty provisions and particularly interpreting the expression ‘in connection with PE’. Whereas in the instant case before us, the assessee had admittedly offered the income under the domestic provisions and had not even disputed the same. Hence the decision of Special Bench of Delhi Tribunal relied upon by the ld. AR does not come to the rescue of the assessee in the instant case. 10.10. Moreover, we find that the decision of Delhi Tribunal relied by ld. DR in the case of B J Services Co. Middle East has been approved by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court reported in 380 ITR 138 (Uttarakhand) wherein it was held that interest on refund u/s 244A of the Act arising to a foreign company would be taxed at Maximum Marginal Rate. 10.11. In view of the aforesaid observations and respectfully following the judicial precedents relied upon hereinabove, the Ground No. 5 raised by the assessee for the Asst Year 2015-16 is dismissed.”
By respectfully following the order of the Tribunal in the case of Schlumberger Asia Services Ltd. (supra), we hold that interest refund under Section 244A of the Act arising to foreign company would be taxed at maximum marginal rate. Accordingly, we allow the Revenue’s Order pronounced in the open court on 19th November, 2025
More judgments on Section 244A
- Shailesh Khodabhai Ramani, Rajkot vs ITO, Ward-2(1)(3), RajkotITA 366/RJT/2024[2012-13]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2012-13
- Shailesh Khodabhai Ramani, Rajkot vs ITO, Ward-2(1)(5), RajkotITA 257/RJT/2024[2011-12]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2011-12
- Credit Agricole Corporate and Investment… vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax…ITA 3453/MUM/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
- Credit Agricole Corporate and Investment… vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 6805/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Pratibha Sanjai Srivastava, Ahmedabad vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 7(2)(1), AhmedabadITA 2565/AHD/2026[2021-2022]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2021-2022
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Tvl. Jeyarani Shopping Centre vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer -1/The Deputy Commercial Tax OfficerMadras · 14 Oct 2026
- Rohan Tanna vs. Directorate General Of Goods And Services Tax IntelligenceChhattisgarh · 14 Oct 2026
- Dipak Saikia vs. The Union Of INDIA And 4 OrsGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- Saraswati Phukan vs. The Union Of INDIA And 4 OrsGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- Sanjay Maheshwari vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 14 Oct 2026