← 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

Chandrakant Gordhanbhai Patel HUF, Dabhoi vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(3), Vadodara

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 485/AHD/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: The Final Hearing Of This Appeal Petition…”

For Appellant: None(Written Submission filed by the assessee)For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Jain, Sr. D.R
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250

double additions to that effect. This aspect shall also be looked into by the authorities, so that the assessee do not suffer from double taxation of the same income, which is not permissible. Suffice to say that authorities are vested with powers and they must use their powers with great

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Bengaluru vs. Dell International Services India Pvt Ltd, Bengaluru

ITA 722/BANG/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Smt. Mahima Goud, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri D.K Mishra, CIT (DR)
Section 10ASection 10BSection 154Section 92CSection 92C(4)

said to be the ALP determined by the AO. The MAP is a procedure agreed between the two countries under Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA). Article 27 of the CONVENTION BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDIA FOR THE AVOIDANCE ... DOUBLE TAXATION AND THE PREVENTION OF FISCAL EVASION WITH RESPECT TO TAXES ON INCOME reads as under: - “ARTICLE 27 MUTUAL AGREEMENT PROCEDURE 1. Where a person considers that the actions of one or both of the Contracting States result or will result for him in taxation not in accordance with

Andrew Jerome Joseph, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer-Ward 5(3)(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 664/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Sri Abdul Kadir Jawadwala, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel for department
Section 143(1)Section 90

Rs.2,01,024/- and also paid tax on it at Rs.63,342/- and levying of additional tax of Rs.28,431/- is amounting to double taxation. In our opinion, the plea of the assessee is justified. The assessee has filed the copy of Form No.67 before Ld. CIT(A). He ought ... credit for foreign taxes. Article 24(4)(a) is relevant in the present context. Same is extracted below: “4. In the case of India, double taxation shall be avoided as follows: (a) the amount of Australian tax paid under the laws of Australia and in accordance with the provisions

Krishnakumar Balasankara Subramanian, Bangalore vs. DCIT Circle 3(3)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 247/BANG/2024[ 2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2024

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Smt. Preeti Goel, A.RFor Respondent: Sri V. Parithivel, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 220(2)Section 234BSection 245Section 90

disallowing the claim for Foreign Tax Credit (FTC) of INR preferred by the Appellant under Article 23(2) of the India-Japan Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) read with Section 90 of Act and thereby raising a demand of INR 6,81,430 incorrectly. 2. Learned AO has erred ... Rs.2,01,024/- and also paid tax on it at Rs.63,342/- and levying of additional tax of Rs.28,431/- is amounting to double taxation. In our opinion, the plea of the assessee is justified. The assessee has filed the copy of Form No.67 before Ld. CIT(A). He ought

DCIT-19(3), Mumbai vs. Ramona Pinto, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue Department stands dismissed

ITA 345/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Milin Datani, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 2(47)Section 250Section 28

During A.Y. 2014-15, the assessee has received part amount of Rs. 3 crore which cannot be taxed again as this would amount to double taxation of the same amount, once on accrual basis and again on receipt basis; such double taxation is impermissible in law; iii. No reasons furnished

Huntsman Investments (Netherlands), Mumbai vs. The Dy Commissioner of Income Tax International Tax Circle-2(2)(2), Mumbai

ITA 4222/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Miss. Padmavathy S.

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 234ASection 234B

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “I”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MISS. PADMAVATHY S

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 4(1)(1), Bangalore vs. Ramesh Narayana Reddy (HUF), Bangalore

ITA 720/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavdcit, Circle - 4(1)(1) Ramesh Narayana Reddy (Huf) Room No. 230, 2Nd Floor #62, Sonnenahalli Bmtc Building, Koramangala Vs. Mahadevapura Bangalore 560095 Bangalore 560048 Pan – Aamhr4231A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri V. Srinivasan, Advocate Revenue By: Shri Subramanian S., Jcit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 24.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.07.2024 O R D E R Per: Prakash Chand Yadav, J.M. The Present Appeal Of The Revenue Challenges The Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/2003-24/1061428431(1) Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 23.02.2024 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) In Respect Of Assessment Year (Ay) 2020-21. 2. Aggrieved With The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) The Revenue Has Come Up In Appeal Before Us & Raised The Following Grounds: - “The Ld. Addl. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs. 1,18,01,752 As Deemed Rental Income On The Ground That There Was No Addition Made In The Case Of Other Two Co-Owners Of The Same Property For The Same Assessment Year. The Nfac Has Not Considered That The Assessments Of Three Different Co-Owners Were Completed In Faceless Manner. There Is No Algorithm For Allocation Of Cases Of Three Different Assessees Having Common Interest In A Single Property To A Single Assessing Officer For Assessment. Hence, Omission Of Addition In Cases Of Other Two Co-Owners Of The Property Wherein Assesses Is An Owner May Be Because

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian S., JCIT-DR
Section 194Section 250

addition of Rs 4,75,590/- would be made because of the wrong mentioning of the provisions of TDS it would be amounting to double taxation. We observe that there is no clear finding of the AO or CIT(A) on this issue as to what was the monthly rent

Avana Global Fzco, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (International Tax)-1, Mumbai

ITA 2731/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble & Smt. Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon'Bleι.Τ.Α. No. 2731/Mum/2024

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna, Shri Hardik Nirmal & Ms. HinalFor Respondent: Smt. Shaileja Rai, CIT, D/R
Section 143(3)Section 144C(3)Section 263

order cannot be set-aside iv. the impugned issue i.e., denial of the benefit of Article 8 of India and United Arab Emirates (UAE) Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) with respect to its subject income derived from operations of ship in international traffic (freight income and inland haulage charges ... outside India, as the case may be, under sub-section (1) for granting relief of tax, or as the case may be, avoidance of double taxation, then, in relation to the assessee to whom such agreement applies, the provisions of this Act shall apply to the extent they are more

ACIT, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai vs. De Beers Uk Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the learned assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 2466/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, Jm The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. De Beers U K Limited Income Tax ( International C/O S R Batliboi & Co Taxation 2(1) (1) Mumbai 14Th Floor 17Th Floor Air India Building The Ruby Nariman Point 29, Senapati Bapatmarg Mumbai Dadar W Mumbai (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aacct5530B

For Appellant: Shri Pranay GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sant , SR DR
Section 143Section 144C

amounting to Rs. 1,026,221,488 is not chargeable to tax as fees for technical services or royalty as per the Indo UK Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement. (ITA number 6509, 2267, 5733, 5734, 1833/MU M/2016) for assessment year 2009 – 10, 2010 – 11, 2011 – 12, ITA number 2466/M/2024 ... cannot be held to be taxable within the purview of royalty or under FTS as per India United Kingdom Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement. Accordingly, all the grounds of the appeal raised by the learned assessing officer are dismissed, order of the learned CIT – A is upheld. 13. In the result

Tech Data (Singapore) Pte Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT, International Taxation Circle-4(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, ground No.3 of appeal is allowed

ITA 4540/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sant, Addl. CIT D/R
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 234ASection 234BSection 253(1)(d)Section 270ASection 274

that, where the Central Government has entered into an agreement with any other Sovereign Nation for granting relief of tax or for avoidance of double taxation, then the provisions of the Act shall apply to the assessee only to the extent they are more beneficial to it. In case

Korn Ferry (Us), California vs. ACIT, Circle 2(1)(2), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the Stay Application of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2393/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Sh. Deepak Chopra, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 270ASection 274Section 9(1)(vi)Section 9(1)(vii)

received as consultancy and training fees, as being in the nature of Fees for Included Services ('FIS') under Article 12 of the India-USA Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) read with section 9(1)(vii) of the Act 5. That the AO/DRP failed to appreciate that in absence ... make-available", payments received by the Appellant as consultancy fees could not be taxed as FIS under Article 12 of the India-USA Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement ('DTAA) read with section 9(1)(vii) of the Act. 6. That the AO/DRP failed to appreciate that the training(s) were provided

Wild West Domains, Llc, Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle-3(1)(1), Int. Tax., New Delhi

ITA 1774/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.1774/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 बनाम Wild West Domains, Llc Acit, Go Daddy India Domains & Hosting Vs. Circle-3(1)(1), Int. Services Private Limited, First Floor, Taxation, 01A167, Wework Bristol Chowk, Civic Centre, Platina Tower, Mg Road, Sector-28, Minto Road, Gurgaon, Haryana. Newdelhi. Pan No.Aabcw2372H अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 115ASection 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 234ASection 234DSection 244ASection 274Section 9

well as Ld. Dispute Resolution Panel (“DRP”) have erred in not allowing to the Appellant, the benefit of India-USA Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (“DTAA”) by holding that the Appellant does not qualify as a tax resident thereof under Article 4 of the India-USA DTAA. TAXABILITY OF INCOME FROM ... assessee is challenging the order of the AO as well as the DRP in not allowing the assessee the benefit of India USA Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) holding that the assessee does not qualify as a tax resident under Article 4 of India USA DTAA. I.T.A.No.1774/Del/2022 3. Brief

Ndtv Worldwide Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT 18(1), New Delhi

ITA 1180/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Anubhav Sharmandtv Worldwide Ltd, Vs. Dcit, Okhla Industrial Estate, Circle-18(1), Phase-Ii, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaccn9121G

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Tiwari, Ms Tanya &For Respondent: Shri Sandeep K Mishra &
Section 1Section 142Section 143Section 143(3)Section 2Section 3

during the relevant year under consideration, without appreciating that such amount having been reversed and offered to tax in subsequent year, would amount to double taxation. 3. That the CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in alleging that the documents placed on record does not ‘demonstrate ... assessee in subsequent Assessment Year 2015-16. So, the dispute is now revenue neutral and the impugned orders making amount subject of double taxation. As with regard to the ground no. 3.1 it was NDTV Worldwide Ltd submitted that the terms of SPA establish there was a conditional agreement

Anindya Sarkar, Kolkata vs. A.D.I.T., CPC, Bengaluru, Bengalru

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1345/KOL/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Jul 2024AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri C.M. Roy, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Subhro Das, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 90

relief under Section 90 of the Act was claimed by the assessee, who is an Indian resident, since India has entered into a Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (for short ‘DTAA’) with Singapore from where he had earned income. The claim of Foreign Tax Credit was not allowed as Form ... Form 67 cannot take away the right vested under the sovereign agreement between India and Singapore signed under Section 90 of the Act as double taxation of the same income under two tax jurisdiction amounts to violation of spirit of Section 90 and the consequent DTAA between two countries. Before

Visteon Corporation, Michigan vs. DCIT, Intenl Taxn, Circle-2(2), Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 262/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:259, 260, 261 & 262/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 & S.A. Nos. 28, 29 & 30/Chny/2023 [In Ita Nos. 259, 261 & 262/Chny/2023] M/S. Visteon Corporation, The Deputy Commissioner Grace Lake Corporation Centre, Vs. Of Income Tax, Van Buren Township, International Taxation, Michigan - 48111 Circle 2(2), Chennai. Pan: Aadcv 5660K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate (By Virtual) Shri Aditya Vohra, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Bara Som, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01.07.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.07.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh: These Three Appeals By The Assessee In Ita Nos.259, 261 & 262/Chny/2023 Are Arising Out Of The Final Assessment Orders Passed By The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, International Taxation Circle 2(2), Chennai Vide Orders Of Even Date 06.01.2023 In Pursuant To The Directions Of The Dispute Resolution Panel-2

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate (By Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Nilay Bara Som, CIT
Section 142(1)Section 263

have erred in law by treating the amount as ‘fees for included services’ under Article 12(4) the India-USA Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (‘DTAA’). 7. Notwithstanding the above, the learned AO and the DRP have erred in law by not granting credit of taxes deducted at source ... relation to the services provided by the company were not taxable in India under the provisions of the Act and under the India-USA Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement. The AO issue show-cause notice dated 17.02.2022 requiring the assessee to show-cause as to why the said sum of Rs.1

Visteon Corporation, Michigan vs. DCIT, Intenl Taxn, Circle-2(2), Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 261/CHNY/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:259, 260, 261 & 262/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 & S.A. Nos. 28, 29 & 30/Chny/2023 [In Ita Nos. 259, 261 & 262/Chny/2023] M/S. Visteon Corporation, The Deputy Commissioner Grace Lake Corporation Centre, Vs. Of Income Tax, Van Buren Township, International Taxation, Michigan - 48111 Circle 2(2), Chennai. Pan: Aadcv 5660K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate (By Virtual) Shri Aditya Vohra, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Bara Som, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01.07.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.07.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh: These Three Appeals By The Assessee In Ita Nos.259, 261 & 262/Chny/2023 Are Arising Out Of The Final Assessment Orders Passed By The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, International Taxation Circle 2(2), Chennai Vide Orders Of Even Date 06.01.2023 In Pursuant To The Directions Of The Dispute Resolution Panel-2

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate (By Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Nilay Bara Som, CIT
Section 142(1)Section 263

have erred in law by treating the amount as ‘fees for included services’ under Article 12(4) the India-USA Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (‘DTAA’). 7. Notwithstanding the above, the learned AO and the DRP have erred in law by not granting credit of taxes deducted at source ... relation to the services provided by the company were not taxable in India under the provisions of the Act and under the India-USA Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement. The AO issue show-cause notice dated 17.02.2022 requiring the assessee to show-cause as to why the said sum of Rs.1

Visteon Corporation, Michigan vs. DCIT International Taxation, Circle 2(2), Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 260/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:259, 260, 261 & 262/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 & S.A. Nos. 28, 29 & 30/Chny/2023 [In Ita Nos. 259, 261 & 262/Chny/2023] M/S. Visteon Corporation, The Deputy Commissioner Grace Lake Corporation Centre, Vs. Of Income Tax, Van Buren Township, International Taxation, Michigan - 48111 Circle 2(2), Chennai. Pan: Aadcv 5660K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate (By Virtual) Shri Aditya Vohra, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Bara Som, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01.07.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.07.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh: These Three Appeals By The Assessee In Ita Nos.259, 261 & 262/Chny/2023 Are Arising Out Of The Final Assessment Orders Passed By The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, International Taxation Circle 2(2), Chennai Vide Orders Of Even Date 06.01.2023 In Pursuant To The Directions Of The Dispute Resolution Panel-2

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate (By Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Nilay Bara Som, CIT
Section 142(1)Section 263

have erred in law by treating the amount as ‘fees for included services’ under Article 12(4) the India-USA Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (‘DTAA’). 7. Notwithstanding the above, the learned AO and the DRP have erred in law by not granting credit of taxes deducted at source ... relation to the services provided by the company were not taxable in India under the provisions of the Act and under the India-USA Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement. The AO issue show-cause notice dated 17.02.2022 requiring the assessee to show-cause as to why the said sum of Rs.1

Visteon Corporation, Michigan vs. DCIT, Intenl Taxn, Circle-2(2), Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 259/CHNY/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:259, 260, 261 & 262/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 & S.A. Nos. 28, 29 & 30/Chny/2023 [In Ita Nos. 259, 261 & 262/Chny/2023] M/S. Visteon Corporation, The Deputy Commissioner Grace Lake Corporation Centre, Vs. Of Income Tax, Van Buren Township, International Taxation, Michigan - 48111 Circle 2(2), Chennai. Pan: Aadcv 5660K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate (By Virtual) Shri Aditya Vohra, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Bara Som, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01.07.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.07.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh: These Three Appeals By The Assessee In Ita Nos.259, 261 & 262/Chny/2023 Are Arising Out Of The Final Assessment Orders Passed By The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, International Taxation Circle 2(2), Chennai Vide Orders Of Even Date 06.01.2023 In Pursuant To The Directions Of The Dispute Resolution Panel-2

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate (By Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Nilay Bara Som, CIT
Section 142(1)Section 263

have erred in law by treating the amount as ‘fees for included services’ under Article 12(4) the India-USA Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (‘DTAA’). 7. Notwithstanding the above, the learned AO and the DRP have erred in law by not granting credit of taxes deducted at source ... relation to the services provided by the company were not taxable in India under the provisions of the Act and under the India-USA Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement. The AO issue show-cause notice dated 17.02.2022 requiring the assessee to show-cause as to why the said sum of Rs.1

Karma Logistics Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, WD-6(3)(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 2724/MUM/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Smt Renu Jauhrii T A. No.2724/Mum/2024 (A.Y.2008-09)

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 69C

income, corresponding to disputed expenses, has already been brought to tax @ 8% of gross receipts and impugned addition had resulted into a case of double taxation; 3.0 The Ld. CIT(A), before confirming the addition u/s 69C of Rs.18,24,020/-, ought to have considered the understated vital facts, being

Dy. CIT Circle 3(4), Mumbai vs. Asian Paints Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by assessee and Revenue for A

ITA 3083/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘A‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(43)Section 35Section 40Section 80GSection 90

said company and taxing the same once again in the hands of its dealer. (i.e. assessee in the present case) would lead to double taxation, which is against the principle of taxation, unless mandated in certain circumstances. Further, it is also the fact that the said free trips to dealers