← All Phrases

“treaty benefits”

International TaxSection 90Section 90229 judgments

The decision most relied on for treaty benefits is Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan (263 ITR 706), cited in 691 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on treaty benefits

Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan
263 ITR 706 · 2003 · Supreme Court
691
citing judgments

A citizen is free to carry on business within the law, and mere tax planning without a motive to evade taxes through colorable devices is not frowned upon. The liability to taxation, for the purpose of tax treaty application, is a legal situation, not the fiscal fact of actual payment.

India Vs. Azadi Bachao Andolan 263 ITR 706 (SC); and Vodafone International Holdings B.V v. Union of India
341 ITR 1 · 2012 · Supreme Court
295
citing judgments

Legitimate tax planning is permissible, allowing taxpayers to arrange their affairs to minimize tax liabilities while respecting the "look at test" for transaction genuineness and the separate entity principle in corporate taxation. The source of funds for treaty-beneficial structures does not automatically invalidate the transaction.

(i) Formula One World Championship Ltd. v. CIT
394 ITR 80 · 2017 · Supreme Court
200
citing judgments

This case provides foundational principles that illuminate the contours of the concept of 'Permanent Establishment' (PE) under tax treaties, especially regarding a 'fixed place' PE.

DIT v. Guy Carpenter & Co Ltd.
346 ITR 504 · 2012 · High Court
171
citing judgments

For fees for technical services to be taxable under a tax treaty's 'make available' clause, a transfer of technology enabling the recipient to independently perform the service in the future is necessary, beyond mere service rendition. The case also clarifies that re-insurance services do not constitute 'imparting' of information taxable as royalty.

CIT v. P.V.A.L. Kulandagan Chettiar
267 ITR 654 · 2004 · Supreme Court
85
citing judgments

This case established a principle regarding the application of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements (DTAAs) versus domestic tax law, particularly concerning the use of more beneficial provisions for an assessee, though its specific impact has been nullified by subsequent legal amendments.

(5)) 3.12. DCIT v. Patni Computer Systems Ltd.
114 ITD 159 · 2008 · ITAT
44
citing judgments

An assessee has the option to choose between the provisions of the Income-tax Act and a Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) in any given year, and the non-election of DTAA benefits in one year does not prevent claiming them in subsequent years.

Sanofi Pasteur Holding SA v. Department of Revenue
354 ITR 316 · 2013 · High Court
42
citing judgments

Gains from the indirect transfer of shares in a foreign company holding Indian shares are not taxable in India under the relevant tax treaty, which is considered a self-contained code to be interpreted plainly. Creating corporate structures or special purpose vehicles for investment to secure tax benefits is a legitimate business activity.

Invensys Systems Inc. v. DIT
323 ITR 184 · 2010 · Reported
41
citing judgments

Payments for services are not taxable as fees for technical services (FTS) under a Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) if the services do not 'make available' any technical knowledge, know-how, or expertise to the recipient in India.

Judgments citing treaty benefits

Ge Engine Services Llc, United States of America vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi

ITA 3700/DEL/2023[AY 2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2026

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 9(1)

paragraph 1(b) of Article 4 of the DTAA. Thus, in the case of LLCs, even if the shareholders are resident in USA, Treaty benefits are not available to the corporation. 4. 5. Thus, the assessee is not a resident of USA in terms of the definition of resident given ... DTAA. In view of the above, the Panel finds no infirmity in the conclusion of the AO in treating the assessee not eligible for treaty benefits. Hence, the objections raised in Ground 2 are rejected. 6. Aggrieved with aforesaid findings of the DRP, the assessee is in appeal before

Hareon Solar Singapore Private Limited, Singapore vs. DCIT Int. Taxation Circle-2(1)(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 2226/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jan 2026AY 2020-21
Section 112Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

DTAA. It was submitted that the same was brought to tax by the AO under the provisions of India Singapore DTAA, and treaty benefit was allowed by the AO. It was submitted that in earlier years also, the assessee offered to tax interest on CCD by invoking provisions of India ... Singapore DTAA, which claim of treaty benefit was accepted by the Revenue. It was submitted by learned counsel for the assessee that as per provisions of DTAA, exemption was claimed on the capital gain arising from sale of equity shares and the CCDs while filing the return of income

Fort Canning Credit Investments Pte. Ltd., Singapore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax (International Taxation) - 2(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2104/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jan 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2022-23 Fort Canning Investments Assistant Commissioner Of Pte. Ltd. Income-Tax (International 260 Orchard Road, #14-02 Taxation) - 2(3)(1) Vs. The Heeren, Singapore, Mumbai Singapore – 238855 (Pan: Aaccf9284G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2022-23 Fort Canning Credit Assistant Commissioner Of Investments Pte. Ltd. Income-Tax (International 260 Orchard Road #14-02 Taxation) - 2(3)(1) Vs. The Heeren, Singapore, Mumbai Singapore – 238855 (Pan: Aadcf7866R) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Dhanesh Bafna, Ms. Priyanka Agarwala, Ms.Hirali Desai, Ms. Nidhi Agarwal & Shri Yogesh Malpani, Cas Revenue : Shri Satya Pal Kumar, Cit Dr & Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.01.2026 Fort Canning Investments Pte. Ltd. & Fort Canning Credit Investments Pte. Ltd. Ay 2022-23

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh BafnaFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar, CIT DR and Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 234BSection 270A

avail the benefit of non taxability of this capital gain, the non resident financial creditor was required to furnish certain documents to claim treaty benefits, all of which were furnished for the same. This position adopted by the committee of creditors of DHFL reflects that the settlement consideration was intended ... capital gain on the said transaction to arrive at capital gains. Assessee being non-resident and having furnished all the necessary documents to claim treaty benefit, resorted to provisions contained in Article 13(5) of India – Singapore DTAA. Accordingly, apportionment of settlement Fort Canning Investments Pte. Ltd. and Fort Canning

Fort Canning Investments Pte. Ltd., Singapore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax (International Taxation) - 2(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2103/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jan 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2022-23 Fort Canning Investments Assistant Commissioner Of Pte. Ltd. Income-Tax (International 260 Orchard Road, #14-02 Taxation) - 2(3)(1) Vs. The Heeren, Singapore, Mumbai Singapore – 238855 (Pan: Aaccf9284G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2022-23 Fort Canning Credit Assistant Commissioner Of Investments Pte. Ltd. Income-Tax (International 260 Orchard Road #14-02 Taxation) - 2(3)(1) Vs. The Heeren, Singapore, Mumbai Singapore – 238855 (Pan: Aadcf7866R) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Dhanesh Bafna, Ms. Priyanka Agarwala, Ms.Hirali Desai, Ms. Nidhi Agarwal & Shri Yogesh Malpani, Cas Revenue : Shri Satya Pal Kumar, Cit Dr & Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.01.2026 Fort Canning Investments Pte. Ltd. & Fort Canning Credit Investments Pte. Ltd. Ay 2022-23

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh BafnaFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar, CIT DR and Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 234BSection 270A

avail the benefit of non taxability of this capital gain, the non resident financial creditor was required to furnish certain documents to claim treaty benefits, all of which were furnished for the same. This position adopted by the committee of creditors of DHFL reflects that the settlement consideration was intended ... capital gain on the said transaction to arrive at capital gains. Assessee being non-resident and having furnished all the necessary documents to claim treaty benefit, resorted to provisions contained in Article 13(5) of India – Singapore DTAA. Accordingly, apportionment of settlement Fort Canning Investments Pte. Ltd. and Fort Canning

Ishares Core Msci Total International Stock Etf (As A Successor to Ishare Core Taotal International Stock Mauritius Company ), Mumbai vs. Dy CIT (Int. Tax)-2(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6774/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jan 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhailishares Core Msci Emerging Markets Etf (As A Successor To Ishares Core Emerging Markets Mauritius Company) C/O Ernst & Young Llp, 17Th Floor, The Ruby, 29, Senapati Bapat Marg, ............... Appellant Dadar (West), Mumbai - 400028 Pan : Aafci3337N V/S Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax (International Tax) - 2(2)(2) Room No.606, 6Th Floor, Kautilya Bhavan, ……………… Respondent C-41 To C-43, G-Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai – 400051 Ishares Msci All Country Asia Ex Japan Etf C/O Ernst & Young Llp, 17Th Floor, The Ruby, 29, Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar (West), Mumbai - 400028 Pan : Aabti7439L ............... Appellant

For Appellant: Shri Pranav GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 70Section 70(2)

absence thereof, we cannot impose the same. In any event, this question is relevant only in the year in which the assessee claims the treaty benefits and not in this year in which the provisions of the Act are clearly more beneficial to the assessee, and, therefore, the assessee does

Ishares Core Msci Emerging Markets Etf (As A Successor to Ishares Core Emerging Markets Mauritius Company, Mumbai vs. DCIT (Tp) 2(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6051/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jan 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhailishares Core Msci Emerging Markets Etf (As A Successor To Ishares Core Emerging Markets Mauritius Company) C/O Ernst & Young Llp, 17Th Floor, The Ruby, 29, Senapati Bapat Marg, ............... Appellant Dadar (West), Mumbai - 400028 Pan : Aafci3337N V/S Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax (International Tax) - 2(2)(2) Room No.606, 6Th Floor, Kautilya Bhavan, ……………… Respondent C-41 To C-43, G-Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai – 400051 Ishares Msci All Country Asia Ex Japan Etf C/O Ernst & Young Llp, 17Th Floor, The Ruby, 29, Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar (West), Mumbai - 400028 Pan : Aabti7439L ............... Appellant

For Appellant: Shri Pranav GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 70Section 70(2)

absence thereof, we cannot impose the same. In any event, this question is relevant only in the year in which the assessee claims the treaty benefits and not in this year in which the provisions of the Act are clearly more beneficial to the assessee, and, therefore, the assessee does

Ishares Msci All Country Asia Ex Japan Etf, Mumbai vs. DCIT (Int. Tax)-2(2)(2), Mumbai

ITA 6050/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jan 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Pranav GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 70Section 70(2)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL

G S Strategic Investments Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT International Tax Circle 2(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5644/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 112Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 74

that total income is first to be computed under the Act by aggregating and netting gains and losses (including brought forward losses) and thereafter treaty benefit is to be applied; that an assessee cannot, on one hand, claim income as exempt/not chargeable under DTAA and, on the other, carry forward ... deploy a non-chargeable treaty-protected income as a notional base to absorb otherwise valid carried forward losses, effectively neutralising a part of the treaty benefit by indirection. 15. The statutory language of section 74 is of great significance. Section 74 provides that where, in respect of any assessment year

Cpi India I Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle Int Tax 1(2)(1), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1826/DEL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhआअसं.1826/िद"ी/2025(िन.व. 2018-19) Cpi India I Ltd. C/O Vasa Chauhan & Associates, Off. No. 41, 3Rd Floor, Hi Life Premises, P M Road, Santacruz West, Mumbai, Maharashtra 400054 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Aadcc-1505-G बनाम Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax, International Taxation 1(2)(1), Civic Centre, ....."ितवादी/Respondent Minto Road, New Delhi 110002 अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By: Shri Dhanesh Bafna, (Through Vc) & Ms. Kashish Gupta, Chartered Accountants "ितवादी"ारा/Respondent By: Shri M.S Nethrapal, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 05/08/2025 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 31/10/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against Assessment Order Dated 31.01.2025 Passed U/S. 147 R.W.S 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act,1961(Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’), For Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Shri Dhanesh Bafna, Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee Submits That The Assessee Is A Tax Resident Of Mauritius. The Assesee Is An Investment Holding Company. The Assessee Has Obtained Global Business License From The Financial

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna, (Through VC) &For Respondent: Shri M.S Nethrapal, CIT-DR
Section 112(1)(c)Section 147Section 48

that the assessee is liable to tax as per the provisions of section 112(1)(c)(ii) of the Act. The AO also denied Treaty benefit on Long Term Capital Loss determined by the assessee. The ld. AR submits that the issue raised in present appeal has already been considered ... status of the directors and structure of the company have held that the assessee is a mere paper company and is not entitled to treaty benefits. In this regard, the Panel seeks to buttress the findings and the arguments of the AO to establish that what Hon'ble ITAT

Fullerton Financial Holdings Pte. Ltd., Singapore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax - (International Taxation), Circle 2(3)(1) - Mumbai, Mumbai

ITA 1137/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Smt. Renu Jauhri ()

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 153

Incorrect invocation of Article 24A(1) of the India- Singapore DTAA - Affairs of the Appellant Not Arranged with the Primary Purpose of Availing Treaty Benefits 15 ITA No.1137/Mum/2025; A.Y. 2022-23 Fullerton Financial Holdings Pte. Ltd. Proposition No. 2: Incorrect invocation of Article 24A(2) of the India- Singapore DTAA ... benefits under the India-Singapore DTAA • While Article 24A(2) of the India-Singapore DTAA, a Singapore resident entity would not be eligible for treaty benefits if such entity is a "shell or conduit" company, i e. it is an entity which has nil or negligible business operations in Singapore

Goldman Sachs (Singapore) Pte, Singapore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Internation Tax)-2(3)(2), Mumbai

ITA 2063/MUM/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Hiten Thakkar (VirtuallyFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 250

treaty can result in the entire (gross) income being not subject to tax in India in a year where a taxpayer claims treaty benefits. Therefore, in a year in which a taxpayer claims benefit of Article 13(4) of the India- Mauritius tax treaty, the entire gains he earns will ... extent of inconsistency with the terms of the DTAC." 23. There could however be years where a taxpayer chooses not to claim treaty benefit as we have already noted above that he can do so under the provisions of section 90(2) of the Act. When he does

Goldman Sachs (Singapore) Pte, Singapore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Internation Tax)-2(3)(2), Mumbai

ITA 2062/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Hiten Thakkar (VirtuallyFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 250

treaty can result in the entire (gross) income being not subject to tax in India in a year where a taxpayer claims treaty benefits. Therefore, in a year in which a taxpayer claims benefit of Article 13(4) of the India- Mauritius tax treaty, the entire gains he earns will ... extent of inconsistency with the terms of the DTAC." 23. There could however be years where a taxpayer chooses not to claim treaty benefit as we have already noted above that he can do so under the provisions of section 90(2) of the Act. When he does

Ankitha Bhaskar Shetty, London vs. Income Tax Officer, Karnataka

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1152/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Chodhry & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Smt. Preethi Goel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel for Department
Section 192

exceptions under the DTAA apply. Therefore, the key question is whether the assessee rendered services in the UK and whether her residential status and treaty benefits can be established. . Page 4 of 4 10.2 These aspects were not fully verified by the AO due to absence of documents. Now, before

Sky High II Leasing Company Limited, Mumbai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (International Tax) Circle 4(2)(1), Mumbai

ITA 1550/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

Section 143(3)Section 9(1)(vi)

international level could not override the domestic legal requirement of notification and therefore the revenue’s reliance on the MLI to deny treaty benefits is not sustainable. With respect to applicability of PPT on merits of the case the Tribunal held that –  The assessee had a valid Tax Residency Certificate ... removed aircraft-leasing income from source-based taxation. Relief from source taxation of aircraft-leasing income was a substantive object of the treaty.  The treaty benefits claimed by the assessee aligned perfectly with the object and purpose of the DTAA, which was to promote investment and ease of business

Sky High Lxxx Leasing Company Limited, Mumbai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (International Tax) Circle 4(2)(1), Mumbai

ITA 1549/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

Section 143(3)Section 9(1)(vi)

international level could not override the domestic legal requirement of notification and therefore the revenue’s reliance on the MLI to deny treaty benefits is not sustainable. With respect to applicability of PPT on merits of the case the Tribunal held that –  The assessee had a valid Tax Residency Certificate ... removed aircraft-leasing income from source-based taxation. Relief from source taxation of aircraft-leasing income was a substantive object of the treaty.  The treaty benefits claimed by the assessee aligned perfectly with the object and purpose of the DTAA, which was to promote investment and ease of business

Sky High Lxxviii Leasing Company Limited, Mumbai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (International Tax) Circle 4(2)(1), Mumbai

ITA 1548/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

Section 143(3)Section 9(1)(vi)

international level could not override the domestic legal requirement of notification and therefore the revenue’s reliance on the MLI to deny treaty benefits is not sustainable. With respect to applicability of PPT on merits of the case the Tribunal held that –  The assessee had a valid Tax Residency Certificate ... removed aircraft-leasing income from source-based taxation. Relief from source taxation of aircraft-leasing income was a substantive object of the treaty.  The treaty benefits claimed by the assessee aligned perfectly with the object and purpose of the DTAA, which was to promote investment and ease of business

Sky High Xc Leasing Company Limited, Mumbai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (International Tax) Circle 4(2)(1), Mumbai

ITA 1547/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

Section 143(3)Section 234B

Principal Purpose Test ('PPT') satisfied by the Appellant on merits - Claiming treaty benefit is in accordance with the object and purpose of treaty 3. Applicability of Article 8 of India- Ireland DTAA #9 #9 #9 #9 #9 4. No Permanent Establishment in India 5. Nature of lease rental and supplemental ... international level could not override the domestic legal requirement of notification and therefore the revenue's reliance on the MLI to deny treaty benefits is not sustainable. With respect to applicability of PPT on merits of the case the Tribunal held that The assessee had a valid Tax Residency Certificate

Sky High Lxxix Leasing Company Limited, Mumbai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (International Tax) Circle 4(2)(1), Mumbai

ITA 1546/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

Section 143(3)Section 9(1)(vi)

international level could not override the domestic legal requirement of notification and therefore the revenue’s reliance on the MLI to deny treaty benefits is not sustainable. With respect to applicability of PPT on merits of the case the Tribunal held that –  The assessee had a valid Tax Residency Certificate ... removed aircraft-leasing income from source-based taxation. Relief from source taxation of aircraft-leasing income was a substantive object of the treaty.  The treaty benefits claimed by the assessee aligned perfectly with the object and purpose of the DTAA, which was to promote investment and ease of business

Ebay Singapore Services Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 2(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 2378/MUM/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Smt. Renu Jauhri ()

Section 143(2)Section 253

learned AO have erred in denying the entitlement of the Appellant to the benefits of the India-Singapore DTAA. The Appellant prays the treaty benefits are granted. 3 ITA No.2378/Mum/2022; A.Y. 2019-20 Ebay Singapore Services Private Limited 4. the learned DRP/ the learned AO have erred in holding that ... appropriate circumstance. Accordingly the application seeking admission of additional ground is not admitted. 5. The Ld.Sr.Counsel raised various Ground Nos.3-7: prepositions challenging denial of treaty benefit to the assessee as per India India-Singapore DTAA. Before raising his arguments, he took us through the facts that led to the issue

Kosi Aviation Leasing Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Int. Taxation Circle-2(1)(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assesses are allowed, pro tanto

ITA 994/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआअसं.994/िद"ी/2025(िन.व. 2022-23) Kosi Aviation Leasing Ltd., C/O Dmd Advocates, 30, Nizamuddin East, New Delhi 110013 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan : Aaick-6199-B बनाम Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle 2(1)(2), Civic Centre, ....."ितवादी/Respondent Minto Road, New Delhi 110002 आअसं.1027/िद"ी/2025(िन.व. 2022-23) Hoohly Aviation Leasing Ltd., C/O Dmd Advocates, 30, Nizamuddin East, New Delhi 110013 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan : Aafch-6609-C बनाम Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle 2(1)(1), Civic Centre, ....."ितवादी/Respondent Minto Road, New Delhi 110002 आअसं.1070/िद"ी/2025(िन.व. 2022-23) Luni Aviation Leasing Ltd., C/O Dmd Advocates, 30, Nizamuddin East, New Delhi 110013 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan : Aaecl-5180-H बनाम Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle 2(2)(1), Civic Centre, ....."ितवादी/Respondent Minto Road, New Delhi 110002

makes it clear that the MLI Notification issued in August 2019, is invalid and does not have the legal sanction to restrict the tax treaty benefits under the existing and notified agreements as the right to enter into an agreement to curb non-taxation or reduced taxation through tax evasion ... similar expressions appear in another DTAA or because a party has subsequently joined a multilateral organisation. Accordingly, the Court held that any extension of treaty benefits to a new OECD member State can take effect only if India consciously accepts such extension, communicates this position to the treaty partner