R AND B FALCON A PTY LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DEHRADUN

ITA 128/DDN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun30 January 2026AY 2022-23Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member & Sh. Manish Agarwal (Accountant Member)13 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee did not have a Permanent Establishment in India in the current assessment year when the interest was received. Therefore, the provisions of Article 12 of the DTAA apply, allowing taxation at 15%.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed that interest on an income tax refund of Rs. 2,02,05,584/- should be taxed at 15% under the India-Australia DTAA. The Assessing Officer taxed it at 40%, considering it business income effectively connected to a Permanent Establishment (PE) in India during earlier assessment years when the refund originated.

What were the issues?

Whether interest on income tax refund is taxable at 15% under the DTAA when the assessee has no Permanent Establishment in India in the year of receipt, and if it is considered business income or income from other sources.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 144C,Section 244A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(5)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, DEHRADUN BENCH, DEHRADUN

Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: CA &
Hearing: 15.01.2026Pronounced: 30.01.2026

Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:

This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2022-23, arises against the CIT(A)-3, Noida’s DIN & order No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26/1076592383(1) dated 30.05.2025, in proceedings u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144C of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

3.

Coming to the assessee/appellant sole substantive ground raised herein, we notice during the course of hearing that it is aggrieved against both the learned lower authorities respective

2 R and B Falcon A Pty Ltd.

findings rejecting it’s claim seeking assessment of i

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 144C

All 3,699 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →