← 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

Schindler China Elevator Company Limited, China vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Int Tax Circle 4(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 4661/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S. & Shri. Raj Kumar Chauhanschindler China Elevator Vs. The Assistant Company Limited Commissioner Of Income C/O. Bansi S. Mehta & Co. Merchant Tax, Int Tax Circle 4(2)(1), Chamber, 3Rd Floor, 41, New Marine Mumbai Lines, Mumbai – 400020. Room No. 1708, 17Th Floor, Air Pan: Aascs8166L India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400021. (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144C(5)Section 2(31)Section 9(1)(i)

that the Appellant and SIPL constitute an AOP. 3. In the absence of Permanent Establishment in India, under Article 7 of the India-China Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (“DTAA”) and in the absence of any business connection as envisaged u/s.9(1)(i) of the Act. the Appellant prays that ... observing or commenting that Appellant and SIPL constitute an AOP. 3. In absence of Permanent Establishment in India, under Article 7 of the IndiaChina Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement ("DTAA") and absence of any business connection as envisaged u/s.9(1)(i) of the Act, the Appellant prays that the addition made

Dow Chemical International Private Limited, Thane vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax - 14(1)(2), Mumbai

ITA 3772/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Rajan VoraFor Respondent: Ms. Rajeshwari Menon, Sr. AR /
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 32

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL

Dow Chemicals International Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Ta-14(1)(2), Mumbai

ITA 1200/MUM/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Nov 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Rajan VoraFor Respondent: Ms. Rajeshwari Menon, Sr. AR /
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 32

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL

Arvind Ambalal Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1) (Old Ward-5(2)(2)), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 381/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 115BSection 129Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 272A(1)(d)Section 68Section 69A

that once the income is shown in the return of income and books of account, the addition of the same amount would result in double taxation. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in case of CIT vs Vishal Exports Overseas Limited, Tax Appeal

Micron Builders, Vashi vs. ITO 28(2)(1), Vashi

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 5002/MUM/2024[AY 2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Nov 2024

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Prabhash Shankarassessment Year: 2015-16 Micron Builders Income Tax Officer F-11, Ward- 28(3)(1) The Affaires (Mall Area), Vrccl-316, 4Th Floor, Plot No.9, Vs. Tower No.6, Sector-17, Sanpada, Vashi Station Complex, Navi Mumbai- 400705. Vashi, Pan: Aarfm8202B Navi Mumbai- 400703. Appellant : Respondent

For Appellant: RespondentFor Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana, Sr. DR

building is already considered by the appellant developer firm as "Sales" under Business Income during AY 2012- 13 & AY 2013-14, resulting in double taxation of the said consideration for taxation. For Micron Builders 3. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in dismissing the appeal merely on account

Aliasagar Inayathusain Bohari, Jalgaon vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Dhule

In the result, the appeal of the appellant for A

ITA 1160/PUN/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1160/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Aliasagar Inayathusain Bohari, Vs. Ito, Ward-3, Dhule. M/S. Saifee Machinery, Shop No.6, Opp. Panchayat Samiti Chopda, Dist. Jalgaon- 425405. Pan : Abapb5558K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 05.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 21.11.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 07.09.2023 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)-11, Pune [‘Ld. Cit(A)’] For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1) On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Cit(A) Is Not Justified In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.70,00,000 When The Impounded Material Is Covered In The Finalized Books Of Accounts Which Were Duly Audited Nothing

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

Learned AO has duly verified that the impounded material has duly been considered by the appellant while filing the ITR. The additions amount to double taxation. The addition may be deleted. 4) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned ... well income when the business is run by the wife of appellant which has been duly disclosed by in her ITR. This amounts to double taxation. The same may please be deleted. Without prejudice to the above 5) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case

Sachin Verma, Hapur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - II, Kanpur

In the result, all the appeals are allowed

ITA 59/LKW/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow20 Nov 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 132Section 153ASection 153D

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH ‘A’, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI

Kamal Kant Verma, Hapur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-II, Kanpur

In the result, all the appeals are allowed

ITA 53/LKW/2022[2018-2019]Status: HeardITAT Lucknow20 Nov 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 132Section 153ASection 153D

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH ‘A’, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI

M/S Standard Frozen Foods Exports Pvt Ltd, Hapur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-II, Kanpur

In the result, all the appeals are allowed

ITA 45/LKW/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow20 Nov 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 132Section 153ASection 153D

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH ‘A’, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI

Mohammed Taj, Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., CC - 3(1), Kolkata

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1184/KOL/2024[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Nov 2024AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No.1184/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Mohammed Taj……….………………………..……….………….…..……Appellant 11, Balmukund Macker Road, Kolkata – 700007. [Pan: Aaccpt0441J] Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-3(1), Kolkata.…....…………..…........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Manish Tiwari, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri A. Kundu, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 12, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 20, 2024 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 28.03.2024 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-21, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Filed Its Return Of Income On 26.03.2022 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.38,93,560/- U/S Section 139 Of The Act. Subsequently, A Search & Seizure Operation U/S 132 Of The Act Was Conducted On 13.01.2021 In The Case Of Hospitality Group Of Cases To Which The Assessee Belongs. The Search Operation Extended To The Premises Of The Assessee At 11, Bal Mukund Mackar Road, Khaja House, Barabazar, Kolkata-700007. Following The Search Operation, The Case Of The Assessee Was Centralized With Central Circle-3(1), Kolkata & Subsequently, The Case Was Transferred To The Pr. Cit-13, Kolkata. Consequently, A Notice U/S 143(2) Of The Act Was Issued Which Was Followed By Issuing A Notice U/S 142(1)

Section 132Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 69C

transactions already reflected in the books of account of the assessee. Therefore, further addition of the same amount as unexplained expenditure would tantamount to double taxation of the same expenditure, which is not permissible in law. The Assessing Officer has neither explicitly rejected the books of account nor he found

Jaspal Singh Bindra, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

The appeal are allowed and the Ld

ITA 1826/KOL/2024[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Nov 2024AY 2022-2023

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2022-23

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Pradip Kumar Biswas, DR
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 90

therefore, relief under Section 90 of the Act was claimed by the assessee, who is an Indian resident, as India has entered into a Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (for short ‘DTAA’) with UK from where he had earned income. However, the Ld. AO in the Intimation issued ... Accordingly, grounds no. 2,3,4 of the appeal are allowed. 8. The relevant extract of Article 24 of India UK Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) is as under: “1. Subject to the provisions of the law of the United Kingdom regarding the allowance as a credit against United Kingdom

Dae Won Kang Up Co Ltd, Tiruvallur vs. DCIT International Taxation - 1(1), Chennai

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1446/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1446/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Dae Won Kang Up Co Limited Dcit C/O. Daewon India Autoparts Private Ltd. International Taxation-1(1) बनाम/ Survey No.477 & 489, No.99, Chennai. Vs. Papparambakkam Village, Tiruvalluvar Tk.- 602 025. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aadcd-7280-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Dr. M.S. Vasan (Advocate) & Dr. Divya Abhishek (Ca) - Ld. Ars " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Ashwin D Gowda (Addl. Cit) - Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 22-10-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 19-11-2024

For Appellant: Dr. M.S. Vasan (Advocate) &For Respondent: Shri Ashwin D Gowda (Addl. CIT) - Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

resident foreign company which is resident of South Korea has accrued or arisen in India without proper reference to the provisions of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA)" Distributive Rules. 5. The Ld AO and CIT(A) have blindly concluded on taxability of the guarantee income as "Other Income" by reference

Palladam Krishnasamy Ganeshwar, Tirupur vs. DCIT, CC-3, Coimbatore

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1220/CHNY/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Nov 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1220/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Shri Palladam Krishnasamy Ganeshwar Dcit बनाम/ 21, Shri Ganesa Textiles, Pollachi Road, Central Circle-3 Vs. Palladam, Tirupur-641 664. Coimbatore. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Adfpg-6476-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओर से/ Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate)-Ld.Ar " थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (Cit)-Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10-09-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 19-11-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate)-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (CIT)-Ld. DR
Section 131Section 143(3)

since this receipt has already been disclosed in the books of BRPL, separate addition thereof in the hands of the assessee would amount to double taxation. Hence, we delete the same and allow the corresponding grounds raised by the assessee. 5. No other ground has been urged in the appeal

Mayur Balasaheb Shinde, Pune vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Pune

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

ITA 1504/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1504/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Mayur Balasaheb Shinde, V The Income Tax Officer, 1, Anil Apartment, Baner S Ward-2(1), Pune. Residency, Baner Road, Near Sakal Nagar, Aunch, Ganeshkind, Pune – 411007. Pan: Drbps7371R Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Sarang Gudhate – Ar Revenue By Shri Prakash L Pathade – Dr Date Of Hearing 13/11/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 18/11/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 31.10.2023 For A.Y.2017-18. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld Assessing Officer Is Erred In Considering The Cash Deposited Of Rs.10,46,000/- As Unexplained Money U/S 69A R.W.S 115Bbe. 2. Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld Assessing Officer Is Erred In Treating Agricultural Income Of Rs.13,63,625/- As Income From Other Sources. 3. Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Assessing Officer Is Erred In Making An Addition On Account Of Cash Deposited Whereas Same Is Already Considered In Net Profit & In Gross Total Income. This Addition Is Resulting As A Double Taxation. 4. The Appellant Craves The Permission To Add, Amend, Modify, Revise, Substitute, Delete Or Alter Any/All Of The Above Grounds Of Appeal If Deemed Necessary At The Time Of Hearing Of The Appeal.” Submission Of Ld.Authorised Representative(Ld.Ar) : 2. Ld.Ar Submitted That There Was Delay In Filing Appeal Before The Itat. Ld.Ar Filed Copy Of Affidavit Of The Assessee Which Explains The Reasons For Delay.

Section 250Section 69A

account of cash deposited whereas same is already considered in Net profit and in gross total income. This addition is resulting as a double taxation. 4. The appellant craves the permission to add, amend, modify, revise, substitute, delete or alter any/all of the above grounds of appeal if deemed necessary

Neetu Agarwal, Kolkata vs. Income Tax Officer, Kolkata

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1898/KOL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Nov 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No.1898/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Neetu Agarwal………………………………………………………….…..……Appellant Flat 6C, Block 2, Shree Ramnagar Residential Complex, Vip Road, Tegharia, W.B – 700052. [Pan: Actpa2426P] Vs. Ito, Kolkata……………..............…..….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Puja Agarwal, A.R, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Pradip Biswas, Addl. Cit- Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 30, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 18, 2024 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 11.07.2024 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. The Assessee Is A Resident Individual, Who Filed Her Return Of Income On 29.12.2021 For The Financial Year 2020-21 Relevant To Assessment Year 2021-22 Reporting A Total Income Of Rs.25,58,440/-. The Assessee Discharged Her Tax Liability By Way Of Tax Deducted At Source Amounting To Rs.2,80,028/-, Self-Assessment Tax Of Rs.22,740/- & Foreign Tax Credit (‘Ftc’) Of Rs.2,25,936/-. The Assessee Also Filed Form.67 Which Was Filed On 25.01.2022. An Intimation U/S 143(1) Of The Act Was Issued On 28.10.2022 In Which The Ftc Was Not Provided To The Assessee. This Disallowance Resulted In Tax Demand Of Rs.2,79,130/-.

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 90

income in Sri Lanka. The ld. AR argued that credit should have been granted u/s 90 of the Act and Article 23 of the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (‘DTAA’) between India and Sri Lanka. The ld. AR further contended that non-filing of Form 67 at the time of filing ... rectification proceedings. The ld. AR stated that DTAA between India and Sri Lanka allows FTC as provided under Article 23 aiming to eliminate double taxation on income. In the instant case, the filing of Form 67 should be considered as procedural mistake rather mandatory, particularly in the light of assessee

Bga Electrical & Services Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 3(2), Port Blair

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1167/KOL/2024[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Nov 2024AY 2021-2022

Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 143(1)Section 234BSection 250Section 90

have considered the rival contentions and gone through the documents before us. It is a settled position that the DTAAs provide for eliminating double taxation of income and such provision would normally override other provisions of the Act. In this case, the appellant is seen to have earned foreign business ... which after discussing a number of authorities it has been held as under: “10. The relevant extract of Article 25 of India Singapore Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) is as under: “1. The laws in force in either of the Contracting States shall continue to govern the taxation of income

Bani Broto Banerjee, Kolkata vs. CIT(A), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 520/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 520/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Bani Broto Banerjee,…………………..…………Appellant Sanskriti, Flat – 3A, 148, Rashbehari Avenue, Near Deshapriya Park, Kolkata-700029 [Pan:Abppb0424P] -Vs.- Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals),……Respondent Aayakar Bhawan Dakshin, 2, Gariahat Road (South), Kolkata-700031 Appearances By: Shri Akshay Ringasia, C.A., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Smt. Ranu Bisws, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 24, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 18, 2024 O R D E R

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 48Section 57

amendment is proposed to take effect from Assessment Year 2024- 25 prospectively. Thus, the proposed amendment in Section 48 to prevent double taxation makes the existing position of law loud and clear. As a corollary, as per the existing position, the assessee is entitled to claim interest on borrowed capital

Shivank Dua, Uttar Pradesh vs. Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, ITO Ward 1(2)(5), Meerut

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3077/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara[Assessment Year: 2021-22

Section 139Section 154Section 250Section 90

after applying exchange rate. The Appellant was eligible to avail Foreign Tax Credit under section 90 of the Act as per Rules of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement formed between two Contracting States i.e., United Kingdom and India. The income tax practitioner hired by the Appellant while filing the income

Maxis Mobile Services Sdn. Bhd., Malaysia vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(2)(1), International Taxation

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

ITA 2746/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Kamal Sawhney, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vijay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 144Section 144C(1)Section 144C(13)Section 148Section 149Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 56

account of IUC and taxed the income as Fee for Technical Services ('FTS') in the hands of the Appellant under the Act and Double taxation Avoidance Agreement ('DTAA'). 2.2 That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned AO has failed to consider the fact that during

Hireright Llc, United States of America vs. Deputy Assisstant Comissioner of Income Tax International Tax Gurugram, Gurugram

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

ITA 1915/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Kishore Kunal, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. C. Chandra Kanta, CIT-DR
Section 13Section 14Section 9(1)(vi)

United States of America (USA) and qualifies as a tax resident of USA within the meaning of Article 4 of the Indo-USA Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA). It is engaged in the business of providing background screening and investing services to its customers in India. The issue at dispute