← All Phrases

“double taxation”

MiscellaneousGeneralGeneral4,703 judgments

The decision most relied on for double taxation is DIT v. New Skies Satellite BV (382 ITR 114), cited in 325 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on double taxation

DIT v. New Skies Satellite BV
382 ITR 114 · 2016 · High Court
325
citing judgments

An amendment to the Income Tax Act, such as the Finance Act, 2012 amendment to Section 9(1)(vi) defining royalty, does not automatically override or alter the definition of 'royalty' as provided in a Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) unless the DTAA itself is bilaterally amended. The definition of royalty in a DTAA remains unaffected by unilateral changes to domestic law.

CIT v. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft
310 ITR 320 · 2009 · High Court
259
citing judgments

Reimbursements of actual expenses without any profit element are not taxable income. Additionally, mere amendments to the Income-tax Act do not override the provisions of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements (DTAAs).

Transmission Corporation of Andhra Pradesh v. CIT
239 ITR 587 · 1999 · Supreme Court
243
citing judgments

The Supreme Court lays down principles for deducting tax at source (TDS) under Section 195 on payments to non-residents, including aspects of income deemed taxable in India and the application of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements (DTAAs) under Section 90.

Raymond Ltd. v. Dy. CIT
86 ITD 791 · 2003 · ITAT
154
citing judgments

For services to qualify as 'Fees for Technical Services' or 'Fees for Included Services' under Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements (DTAAs), they must 'make available' technical knowledge, experience, skill, or processes to the recipient, enabling them to apply such expertise independently.

CIT v. Visakhapatnam Port Trust
144 ITR 146 · 1983 · High Court
124
citing judgments

Sections 4 and 5 of the Income Tax Act, which define total income and chargeability, are subject to Section 90, meaning that Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements (DTAAs) override the Act's provisions in case of a conflict.

Assessing Officer (International Taxation) v. Nestle SA
458 ITR 756 · 2023 · Supreme Court
122
citing judgments

The benefit of a Most Favoured Nation (MFN) clause in a Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) is available only upon notification by the Government. A notification under section 90(1) is a necessary and mandatory condition for giving effect to a DTAA or any protocol that alters existing law.

Ms. Brinda Ramakrishna v. ITO
135 Taxmann.com 358 · 2022 · ITAT
109
citing judgments

The filing of Form 67 for claiming Foreign Tax Credit (FTC) is a directory requirement, not mandatory. Rule 128(9) does not provide for disallowance of FTC due to delay in filing this form. Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements (DTAAs) override domestic law.

CIT v. Havells India Ltd.
352 ITR 376 · 2013 · High Court
97
citing judgments

For royalty income, especially in the context of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements (DTAA), the 'source of income' is the determinative factor for taxability, rather than merely the 'source of receipt'.

Judgments citing double taxation

Shyamal Kumar Ghosh, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 33(5), Kolkata

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

ITA 1813/KOL/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Dec 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No.1813/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shyamal Kumar Ghosh……………………………………………….…..……Appellant 40, Weston Street, 2Nd Floor, Bowbazar, Kolkata – 700013. [Pan: Adtpg3720F] Vs. Ito, Ward-33(5), Kolkata............…..….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Abhishek Bansal, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Akhil Kumar, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 12, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 09, 2024 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 12.12.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. At The Outset, The Ld. Ar Raised Issue Of A Delay Of 198 Days In Filing The Instant Appeal. The Assessee Has Submitted An Application For Condonation Of Delay Citing Valid & Proper Reasons. After Considering The Averments Made In The Application, We Condone The Delay. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2017-18 By Declaring Gross Total Income Of Rs.14,15,352/- & Total Income Of Rs.12,49,520/- After Deduction Under Chapter Vi-A Of The Act. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny & Notices U/S 143(2) & 142(1) Of The Act Were Issued. In Response, The Assessee Submitted Profit & Loss A/C, Balance Sheet And

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 145(3)Section 250Section 44ASection 68Section 69A

without considering the evidences properly. The ld. AR submitted that the amounts were duly taxed by the department and further direction will tantamount to double taxation, which is not permissible in law. Therefore, the ld. AR urged that the orders passed by the authorities below may be set aside

Shree Kaleshwar Tours and Travels, Diva Manpada Road vs. Prabhakar Ward3(3), Thane, Wagle Industrial Estate

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

ITA 3550/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 250

Shri Kaleshwar Tour and Travels of which assessee is proprietor and that entity having no separate legal status, therefore the additions resulted into double taxation. It is argued that such anomaly and double taxation has not been properly decided by the Ld. CIT (A) despite the requisite submissions made

Income Tax Officer - 12(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Dalichand Kapurchand Jewellers Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2477/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2017-18 Ito – 12(2)(1), Mumbai Dalichand Kapurchand Jewellers Private Limited Vs Shop No. 50/51, Gulab Baug, M.G. Road, Opp Railway Station, Santacruz (West), Mumbai-400054. Pan; Aaacd 8748 D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri B.G. SakariaFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. DR
Section 148Section 40A(3)Section 68

income and taxes were paid thereon and if the cash deposited are added under section 68 of the Act then, it will lead to double taxation once as sale and again as unexplained cash credit. They also submitted the quantitative details of the stock during the assessment proceedings which ... 336/Ind/2012) has held that 7 Dalichand Kapurchand Jewellers Private Limited A.Y. 2017-18 "The claim of the appellant that such addition resulted into double taxation of the same income in the same year is also acceptable because on one hand cost of the sales has been taxed (after deducting gross

Rahul Anand, Kolkata vs. A.D.I.T., CPC, Bangalore

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1497/KOL/2024[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Dec 2024AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Rajat Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Supriya Pal, DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 295(1)Section 90

short "AO") and CIT (A) erred in not following the provisions specified in under section 90 of Income Tax Act 1961 for avoidance of double taxation and granting of credit of taxes paid outside India on income which is taxed outside India even after claiming the details of foreign ... Accordingly, grounds no. 2,3,4 of the appeal are allowed.” 6. The relevant extract of Article 23 of India Thailand Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) is as under: “ARTICLE 23 ELIMINATION OF DOUBLE TAXATION 1. The laws in force in either of the Contracting States shall continue to govern

Mahesh Lingappa, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(3)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 1400/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Ms. Pratibha .R, Advocate
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 69A

obtained through the SBN from the total income reported by the assessee, again adding the SBN notes as unexplained investment would amount to double taxation and it cannot be permitted under the provisions of the Act. Further, the entire SBN deposits could not be treated as income of the assessee

DCIT Circle 27(1), New Delhi vs. United Drilling Tools Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5913/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Before Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 36(1)(va)

31/03/2017, the Assessee offered the said amount for taxation in subsequent year, therefore, if the addition is reversed the same will amounts to double taxation, thus, sought for dismissal of Ground No. 2 of the Assessee. 10. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record

Surrendra Kumar Goenka, Howrah vs. ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru / I.T.O., Ward 61(3), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1831/KOL/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Dec 2024AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 5Section 90

erred in not granting credit of foreign taxation paid and should have been duly allowed under Article 23 of the India-Netherland Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) read with Section 90 of the Act. He has also challenged the levying of additional interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C ... 31st January, 2020 and taxes have been paid in Netherlands for the salary income earned and received during said period. Hence, to avoid double taxation , a foreign tax credit amounting to INR 20,64,365/- had been claimed as per Article 23 of the India Netherlands Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement

Shreenathji Associates, Vadodara vs. The ITO, Ward-1(2)(4), Vadodara

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 594/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.592, 593 & 594/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2014-15 Respectively Shreenathji Associates The Ito बनाम/ Sb-1, Shreeji Avenue, W#Ard-1(2)(4) V/S. 11, Sampatrao Colony Vadodara – 390 007 Jetalpur Road Vadodara – 390 007 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Abufs 4107 P (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mehul K. Patel, Ar Revenue By : Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 02/12/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 04/12/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Arise From The Orders Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”] Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”], Dated 11/05/2023, 30/11/2023 & 02/02/2024 Respectively For The Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15 (Both Under Original & Reassessment Proceedings). Since The Issue Involved In All These Appeals Is Common, They Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience.

For Appellant: Shri Mehul K. Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 43C

directed to reduce the income of A.Y.2014-15 to the extent of addition made in A.Y.2013-14 as not doing so would result in double taxation of the same income. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, modify or delete any of the above grounds and to submit additional grounds

Shreenathji Associates, Vadodara vs. The ITO, Ward-1(2)(4), Vadodara

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 593/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.592, 593 & 594/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2014-15 Respectively Shreenathji Associates The Ito बनाम/ Sb-1, Shreeji Avenue, W#Ard-1(2)(4) V/S. 11, Sampatrao Colony Vadodara – 390 007 Jetalpur Road Vadodara – 390 007 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Abufs 4107 P (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mehul K. Patel, Ar Revenue By : Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 02/12/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 04/12/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Arise From The Orders Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”] Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”], Dated 11/05/2023, 30/11/2023 & 02/02/2024 Respectively For The Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15 (Both Under Original & Reassessment Proceedings). Since The Issue Involved In All These Appeals Is Common, They Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience.

For Appellant: Shri Mehul K. Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 43C

directed to reduce the income of A.Y.2014-15 to the extent of addition made in A.Y.2013-14 as not doing so would result in double taxation of the same income. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, modify or delete any of the above grounds and to submit additional grounds

Shreenathji Associates, Vadodara vs. The ITO, Ward-1(2)(4), Vadodara

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 592/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.592, 593 & 594/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2014-15 Respectively Shreenathji Associates The Ito बनाम/ Sb-1, Shreeji Avenue, W#Ard-1(2)(4) V/S. 11, Sampatrao Colony Vadodara – 390 007 Jetalpur Road Vadodara – 390 007 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Abufs 4107 P (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mehul K. Patel, Ar Revenue By : Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 02/12/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 04/12/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Arise From The Orders Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”] Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”], Dated 11/05/2023, 30/11/2023 & 02/02/2024 Respectively For The Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15 (Both Under Original & Reassessment Proceedings). Since The Issue Involved In All These Appeals Is Common, They Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience.

For Appellant: Shri Mehul K. Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 43C

directed to reduce the income of A.Y.2014-15 to the extent of addition made in A.Y.2013-14 as not doing so would result in double taxation of the same income. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, modify or delete any of the above grounds and to submit additional grounds

Madhu Silica Foundation, Bhavnagar vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(8), Bhavnagar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1695/AHD/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Dec 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate & ShriFor Respondent: Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, CIT. D.R
Section 115BSection 12ASection 234ASection 271ASection 68Section 80G

expenditure had already been taxed in the hands of MSPL and therefore taxing it again in the hands of the assessee would result into double taxation. To verify this, the assessee was asked to submit the income tax return (ITR) of Madhu Silica Foundation

Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 681/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri B. Satyanarayana MurthyFor Respondent: : Shri Kumar Pranav, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

Nos.680 & 681/Hyd/2024 5 addition in A.Y. 2012-13. Therefore, the Ld. AR submitted that the addition made by the Ld. AO resulted into double taxation in the hands of the assessee. The Ld. AR brought our attention to the paper book, where page no.10 contains computation of income

Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 680/HYD/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri B. Satyanarayana MurthyFor Respondent: : Shri Kumar Pranav, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

Nos.680 & 681/Hyd/2024 5 addition in A.Y. 2012-13. Therefore, the Ld. AR submitted that the addition made by the Ld. AO resulted into double taxation in the hands of the assessee. The Ld. AR brought our attention to the paper book, where page no.10 contains computation of income

Tractors and Farm Equipment Limited, Chennai vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(2), International Taxation, Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1680/CHNY/2024[AY 2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Dec 2024

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.R. VijayaraghavanFor Respondent: Ms.Gouthami Manivasagam
Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(viii)

source. And since the non-resident dealers had no permanent establishment in India, the receipts were not taxable in their hands as per Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement. And that the payments would not fall under ‘fees for technical services’ since there was no rendering of any technical skill, know

Tractors and Farm Equipment Limited, Chennai vs. The Deputy Commisioner of Income Tax, International Taxation Circle 2(2), Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1676/CHNY/2024[AY 2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Dec 2024

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.R. VijayaraghavanFor Respondent: Ms.Gouthami Manivasagam
Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(viii)

source. And since the non-resident dealers had no permanent establishment in India, the receipts were not taxable in their hands as per Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement. And that the payments would not fall under ‘fees for technical services’ since there was no rendering of any technical skill, know

ACIT It 3 2 1 Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Mckinsey and Company Lme Limited, Ernst and Young LLP Cas

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue Department stands dismissed with liberty as mentioned in para no

ITA 2568/MUM/2024[2021 22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Dec 2024

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryassessment Year: 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri Divesh Chawla, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Ld. Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)

dismissed. However, the Ld. D.R. has submitted that “where appeals of international taxation charges where the deposits relate to applicability of provision is of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (in short “DTAA”) or otherwise the exception carved out in clause 3.1(l)(ii) of the circular No.5/2024 dated 15.03.2024”,” the monetary ... litigation out of disputes related to TDS/TCS matters in both domestic and international taxation charges, wherein disputes relating to appeals of international taxation charges Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement would fall”. 5. We observe that co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the identical addition and facts by considering

Atiresh Sales Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. ITO Ward 1(1)(3)ITO Ward 1(1)(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 763/AHD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Santosh Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 68

allowed against addition of income under section 68 for the year under consideration.” 2. Denial for Telescoping of income results in double taxation on income: “In absence of the telescoping of the income, the addition to Income of Rs. 17,16,445/- under Section 68 in immediately earlier year previous ... income of the Assessee under Section 68, to the tune of Rs. 31,21,841/- in the previous year ended on 31.32013, results in double taxation of the income. Therefore under the circumstances and on facts, telescoping of income to the tune of Rs 17,16,445/- be allowed

M/S. Allsec Technologies Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Intl Tax -1(1, Chennai

In the result, the appeal stand dismissed

ITA 1512/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1512/Chny/2023 (िनधा)रणवष) / Assessment Year: 2015-16) M/S. Allsec Technologies Limited Dcit बनाम/ 46C, Velachery Main Road, Velacherry, International Taxation-1(1) Vs. Chennai-600 042. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.Aacca-5106-G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan (Advocate)-Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/ Respondent By : Ms. Kavitha (Addl.Cit) - Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20-11-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 03-12-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan (Advocate)-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha (Addl.CIT) - Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 201Section 201(1)Section 201(3)Section 40Section 9(1)(i)

considering the exact nature of service for which payment was made, without examine the correct provisions of the law read with provisions of the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement(DTAA). 3.2 The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) ought to have appreciated that since the non-resident was paid service charges

DCIT Corporate Circle 1(1), Chennai vs. Allsec Technologies Limited, Chennai

The appeal stand partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1662/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Dec 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1255/Chny/2019 (िनधा)रणवष) / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1662/Chny/2019 (िनधा)रणवष) / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Dcit M/S. Allsec Technologies Limited बनाम/ Corporate Circle-1(1), 560, 562, 7H Century Plaza, Vs. Chennai. Teynampet, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 018. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.Aacca-5106-G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Revenue By : Ms. Kavitha (Addl.Cit) - Ld. Sr. Dr " थ"कीओरसे/ Assessee By : Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) - Ld.Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20-11-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 03-12-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1.1 Aforesaid Appeals By Revenue For Assessment Year (Ay) 2010-11 & 2011-12 Has Common Issues. First We Take Up Appeal For Ay 2010-11 Which Arises Out Of The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Chennai [Cit(A)] Dated 31-01-2019 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 143(3) R.W.S.

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) - Ld.ARFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha (Addl.CIT) - Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 195Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

nature of marketing and consultancy services is taxable in India @ 15% as per Article 12 Clause 2(a)(2) of India-USA Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) and taxable @ 10% as per Article 12 Clause 1(a)(ii). The Ld.CIT(A) erred in giving relief to the assessee on selling

DCIT Corporate Circle 1(1), Chennai vs. Allsec Technologies Limited, Chennai

The appeal stand partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1255/CHNY/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Dec 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1255/Chny/2019 (िनधा)रणवष) / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1662/Chny/2019 (िनधा)रणवष) / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Dcit M/S. Allsec Technologies Limited बनाम/ Corporate Circle-1(1), 560, 562, 7H Century Plaza, Vs. Chennai. Teynampet, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 018. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.Aacca-5106-G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Revenue By : Ms. Kavitha (Addl.Cit) - Ld. Sr. Dr " थ"कीओरसे/ Assessee By : Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) - Ld.Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20-11-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 03-12-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1.1 Aforesaid Appeals By Revenue For Assessment Year (Ay) 2010-11 & 2011-12 Has Common Issues. First We Take Up Appeal For Ay 2010-11 Which Arises Out Of The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Chennai [Cit(A)] Dated 31-01-2019 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 143(3) R.W.S.

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) - Ld.ARFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha (Addl.CIT) - Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 195Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

nature of marketing and consultancy services is taxable in India @ 15% as per Article 12 Clause 2(a)(2) of India-USA Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) and taxable @ 10% as per Article 12 Clause 1(a)(ii). The Ld.CIT(A) erred in giving relief to the assessee on selling