“DDT”

Special Rate ProvisionsSection 115-OSection 115-O499 judgments

The decision most relied on for DDT is Sesa Goa Ltd. v. JCIT (117 Taxmann.com 96), cited in 291 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on DDT

Sesa Goa Ltd. v. JCIT

117 Taxmann.com 96 · 2020 · High Court

291

citing judgments

Education cess paid on total income and dividend distribution tax are allowable deductions for income tax purposes.

Trib.) Giesecke & Devrient 16.994%). India Pvt Ltd. v. ACIT

120 Taxmann.com 338 · 2020 · High Court

citing judgments

The provisions of a Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) would prevail over the domestic law rate of Dividend Distribution Tax (DDT) under Section 115-O.

Union of India v. Tata Tea Co Ltd.

398 ITR 260 · 2017 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

Dividend Distribution Tax (DDT) is a tax on the profits of the domestic company, not on the shareholder. The Supreme Court's decision in Tata Tea Co. Ltd. did not address the precise nature of DDT as a tax on the company versus the shareholder.

Torrent India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

35 Taxmann.com 300 · 2013 · High Court

citing judgments

Excess Dividend Distribution Tax (DDT) paid by a company is refundable to the assessee, even though Section 115-O(4) states DDT is a final payment.

SIDBI v. CBDT

133 Taxmann.com 158 · 2021 · High Court

citing judgments

Dividend Distribution Tax (DDT) under section 115-O is a charge on the company's profits and not on the income in the hands of the shareholder, meaning it does not constitute double taxation and is not subject to Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements (DTAA).

Genpact India (P). Ltd. v. Dy. CIT

111 Taxmann.com 402 · 2019 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

An assessee can challenge tax liability arising from special charging provisions, such as Section 115QA, by filing a separate appeal under Section 246A. Dividend Distribution Tax (DDT), as an additional tax not linked to the computation of total income, must be appealed independently.

AMD Metplast (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT

20 Taxmann.com 647 · 2012 · High Court

citing judgments

Commission paid to a Managing Director for services rendered is eligible for deduction under section 36(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, provided it is paid as per the terms of employment and not merely to avoid Dividend Distribution Tax (DDT).

Judgments citing DDT

Vikas Arora, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-2, New Delhi

Accordingly, the same is dismissed in limine

ITA 1413/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy

For Appellant: Sh. Rajeev Sachdeva, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT, DR

Section 143(3)

P a g e | 1 ITA Nos. 1413 & 1414/Del/2023 Vikas Arora (AY: 2019-20) THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F

Barclays Global Service Centre Private Limited, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Cir 1(1), Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is Partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 694/PUN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.694/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Barclays Global Service Centre V The Assistant Private Limited, S Commissioner Of Income 5 To 12 Floor(Part), Building Tax, G2 Gera Commerzone Sez, Circle-1(1), Pune. Survey No.65, Kharadi, Vadgaon Sheri, S.O. Pune City, Pune – 411014. Maharashtra. Pan: Aadcb1173D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Riddhi Maru – Ca(Virtual) Revenue By Shri Prakash L Pathade – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 24/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24/06/2025

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

Assessee had filed rectification application before the Assessing Officer with reference to Ground ITA No.694/PUN/2022 [A] No.2 which is related to “Dividend Distribution Tax(DDT) Credit Not Given”. Ld.AR submitted that the Assessing Officer(AO) has not considered the payment of DDT, though copy of challan was provided. Ld.AR submitted

Intertek India Private Limited, Delhi vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 10(1), Delhi

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

ITA 4660/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Anjula Jain, CIT- DR

Section 115Section 237

solitary grievance raised vide five grounds of appeal of the assessee pertains to the rejection of refund of excess Dividend Distribution Tax [DDT] payment made by the assessee. 3. Brief facts of the case is that the assessee is a private limited company incorporated in India and is a subsidiary ... declaring Total Income of Rs. 93,15,62,910/-. During the year, it declared dividend of Rs. 72,69,63,050/- and paid DDT of Rs. 14,94,29,436/- at the rate of 20.56% on the aforesaid dividend, in accordance with provisions of section

ITO Ward-19(2)(4), Mumbai vs. Nicaf LLP, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the cross objection filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1880/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Ito, Ward-19(2)(4), Mumbai Nicaf Llp Room No. 507, 5Th Floor, Income Tax 11/12, Laxmi Mahal, Bombanji Petit Office, Piramal Chambers, Parel, Vs. Road, A. K. Marg, Kemps Corner, Mumbai – 400012. Mumbai – 400036. Pan/Gir No. Aanfn5731A (Appellant) : (Respondent) C.O. No. 86/Mum/2025; (Assessment Year: 2017-18) (Arising Out Of Ita No. 1880/Mum/2025) Nicaf Llp Ito, Ward-19(2)(4), Mumbai Room No. 507, 5Th Floor, Income 11/12, Laxmi Mahal, Bombanji Petit Road, A. K. Marg, Kemps Corner, Vs. Tax Office, Piramal Chambers, Mumbai – 400036. Parel, Mumbai – 400012. Pan/Gir No. Aanfn5731A (Appellant) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nishit Gandhi, Adv. Respondent By : Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr Ar. Date Of Hearing : 16.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.06.2025 O R D E R Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue & Cross Objection Filed By The Assessee, Challenging The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Delhi (‘Ld. Cit(A)’ For Short), National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Nfac’ For Short)

For Appellant: Shri Nishit Gandhi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, SR AR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 47Section 68

partners’ account towards accumulated profit for 3 years from the date of conversion and that the same was to evade Dividend Distribution Tax (DDT) which was liable to be paid by the assessee on profit distribution as dividend. The ld. DR relied on the decision of the coordinate bench

Polycab India Limited, Mumbai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle 5(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4673/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

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

Section 115Section 237Section 9

under:- 1. erred in confirming the action of the AO in rejecting refund claimed by Appellant in respect of the dividend distribution tax (DDT) paid under section 115-0 of the Act, on dividend paid to the International Finance Corporation ('IFC') which is not subjected to tax on account ... International Finance Corporation (Status, Immunities and Privileges) Act, 1958 ('IFC Act, 1958'); 2. erred in not appreciating the fact that the DDT under section 115-0 of the Act, is a tax on the dividend Income earned by the shareholder and therefore, the same is not applicable to IFC since

Polycab India Limited, Mumbai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle 5(2), Mumbai

ITA 4672/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Section 115Section 237Section 9

under:- 1. erred in confirming the action of the AO in rejecting refund claimed by Appellant in respect of the dividend distribution tax (DDT) paid under Section 115-O of the Act, on dividend paid to the International Finance Corporation ('IFC') which is not subjected to tax on account ... International Finance Corporation (Status, Immunities and Privileges) Act, 1958 ('IFC Act, 1958'); 2. erred in not appreciating the fact that the DDT under Section 115-O of the Act, is a tax on the dividend income earned by the shareholder and therefore, the same is not applicable to IFC since

Polycab India Limited, Mumbai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle 5(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4671/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

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

Section 115Section 237Section 9

M/S. Genpact India, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6543/DEL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kailash Dan Ratnoo, CIT DR

Section 10ASection 14A

whereas applicable tax rate on such distributions as per the DTAA between India and Mauritius is 5% and the excess DDT paid therefore merits a refund. He submitted that on merits the issue presently stands decided against the assessee by Special Bench decision in case of Total Oil India

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Genpact India, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6415/DEL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kailash Dan Ratnoo, CIT DR

Section 10ASection 14A

Timken India Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Jamshedpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 92/RAN/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi12 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: BEFORES/SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: S/Shri K.M.Gupta/Krishan Shaw, ARsFor Respondent: Smt. Rinku Singh, CIT DR

Section 115JSection 14ASection 234D

have discussed earlier, the purpose of DTAA is to avoid double taxation/allocation of taxing rights between two Sovereign nations. When we hold that DDT is a tax not on the shareholder but on the amount declared, distributed, paid as the case may be, by way of dividend and being ... that the non-resident in France should be taxed in India. We have to look at the DTAA from the receipients taxability perspective. DDT is paid by the domestic company resident in India. It is a tax on its income and not tax paid on behalf of the shareholder

M/S. Lalitha Jewellery Mart Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Chennai

ITA 680/CHNY/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

For Appellant: Mr. D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. Shiva Srinivas, CIT

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, ‘बी’ यायपीठ, चेई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI श्री एबी टी. वक, ाियक

DCIT, Circle - 19(1), Delhi vs. Pc Jeweller Limited, Delhi

ITA 3084/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 35D

account of short credit of Tax Deducted at Source of Rs.5,62,830/- and short credit of Dividend Distribution Tax ("DDT") paid of Rs.11,66,74,760/-.. 2.0 Mr. Sharad Jain, the tax consultant of the appellant informed that the income declared by the appellant in the return of income

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Cr Building vs. Pc Jeweller Limited, Delhi

ITA 2581/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 35D

account of short credit of Tax Deducted at Source of Rs.5,62,830/- and short credit of Dividend Distribution Tax ("DDT") paid of Rs.11,66,74,760/-.. 2.0 Mr. Sharad Jain, the tax consultant of the appellant due to financial disputes with the appellant informed that the income declared

Tynor Orthotics Private Limited, Mohali vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 6(1), Mohali

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1032/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh26 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. C IT, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 148Section 156Section 270ASection 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 69

आदेश/Order PER LALIET KUMAR, J.M: This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi ddt. 26/09/2024 pertaining to Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. In the present appeal Assessee has raised the following grounds: 1. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income

Veerprabhu Communication Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, CC - 2(4), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 1217/KOL/2024[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 May 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Sanjay Awasthiit(Ss)A No.51/Kol/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Year : 2015-2016) Veerprabhu Communications Private Limited, 30, Jawaharlal Nehru Road, 2Nd Floor, Block C, Kolkata-700016 Vs Acit, Cc-2(4), Kolkata Pan No. : Aabcl 0051 A And

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Prakash Nath Barnwal, CIT-DR

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Kolkata vs. Dhunseri Ventures Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 968/KOL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey&Shri Sanjay Awasthi]

Section 115JSection 80ISection 92C

allowed the appeal of the assessee on all the grounds except the grounds relates to the non- granting of credit of DDT tax paid by the company. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied the revenue has preferred an appeal before us. 5. The Ld. D.R challenges the very impugned order

Toyota Boshoku Automotive India Private Limited, Bidadi vs. Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department Or the DCIT, Circle - 7(1)(1), Koramangala

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

ITA 1539/BANG/2024[AY 2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 May 2025

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri K.R Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (DR)

Section 234ASection 270A

26th June 2019, however the credit of the same was not granted. The learned AR to substantiate the claim filed copy of DDT payment challan as additional evidence before us. The learned AR accordingly prayed before us that the AO should be given directions to provide appropriate relief ... materials placed on record. The issue in dispute pertains to the denial of credit for Dividend Distribution Tax (DDT) amounting to Rs. 14,52,55,114/- and the consequential levy of interest under section 115P of the Act amounting to Rs. 8,11,53,068/- , as computed in the assessment

Raghuvirsinh Harishchandrasinh Zala, Halvad vs. ITO, WD-4, Morbi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, is partly allowed

ITA 298/RJT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot07 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Viral Vajani, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 69

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DINESH MOHAN

DCIT, Central Circle-2(4), Chennai vs. Shri.Jagannathan Sekar, Chennai

ITA 1279/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadishआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.1274, 1275 & 1283/Chny/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs Shri K.Rethinam, Central Circle-2(4), Chennai. # 1/1, Gtn Salai, Opp.Smbm School, Dindigul -624 001. Pan :Arwpr-3777-N (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.1276, 1277 & 1278/Chny/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs Shri S.Ramachandran, Central Circle-2(4), Chennai. # 3/29, New No,3/40, Muthupattinam, S.Kulavaipettai Post, Alangudi Tk-622 001. Pan :Adfpr-3158-Q (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.1279, 1280 & 1281/Chny/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs Shri Jagannathan Sekar Central Circle-2(4), Chennai. # 25, Sambasivam Street, T.Nagar Chennai-600 017. Pan :Bcdps-4688-G (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थीकीओरसे / Revenue By : Mr. V.Justin, Cit प्रत्यर्थीकीओरसे / Assessee(S) By : Mr. Y.Sridhar, F.C.A. & Ms. Varsha Sridhar, C.A सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25.02.2025 घोषणाकीतारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 30.04.2025 Per Bench: आदेश / Order 2

For Respondent: Mr. V.Justin, CIT

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, 'ए' न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, 'A' BENCH, CHENNAI श्री मनु कुमार गिरि, न्यायिक

DCIT, Central Circle-2(4), Chennai vs. S. Ramachandran, Pudukkottai

ITA 1278/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadishआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.1274, 1275 & 1283/Chny/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs Shri K.Rethinam, Central Circle-2(4), # 1/1, Gtn Salai, Chennai. Opp.Smbm School, (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Dindigul -624 001. Pan :Arwpr-3777-N (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.1276, 1277 & 1278/Chny/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs Shri S.Ramachandran, Central Circle-2(4), # 3/29, New No,3/40, Chennai. Muthupattinam, (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) S.Kulavaipettai Post, Alangudi Tk-622 001. Pan :Adfpr-3158-Q (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.1279, 1280 & 1281/Chny/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs Shri Jagannathan Sekar Central Circle-2(4), # 25, Sambasivam Street, Chennai. T.Nagar Chennai-600 017. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Pan :Bcdps-4688-G (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थीकीओरसे / Revenue By Mr. V.Justin, Cit प्रत्यर्थीकीओरसे / Assessee(S) By Mr. Y.Sridhar, F.C.A. & Ms. Varsha Sridhar, C.A सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing 25.02.2025 घोषणाकीतारीख / Date Of Pronouncement 30.04.2025 Per Bench: आदेश / Order 2