“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

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

Sabre Glbl Inc., New Delhi vs. DCIT (International Taxation), Circle- 3(1)(2), New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 4838/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Delhi09 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. G.S.Pannu, Hon’Ble & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No. 216/Del/2016, A.Y. 2012-13 Ita No. 559/Del/2017, A.Y. 2013-14 Ita No. 4838/Del/2017, A.Y. 2014-15 Ita No. 7724/Del/2018, A.Y. 2015-16 Ita No. 6040/Del/2019, A.Y. 2016-17 Sabre Glbl Inc. Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Mr. Tarandeep Singh, Tax, Adv. Circle-3(1)(2), C/O. Ms Associates, International Tax F-99, Lajpat Nagar-Ii, New Delhi New Delhi Pan : Aaact7216Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Sabre Glbl Inc. Income Tax, Mr. Tarandeep Singh, Adv. International Taxation, C/O. Ms Associates, New Delhi F-99, Lajpat Nagar-Ii, New Delhi-110024 Pan : Aaact7216Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Tarandeep Singh, Adv. Revenue By Sh. Vizay B. Vasanta, Cit-Dr

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)

erred in holding / upholding that the appellant has a : (a) Permanent Establishment in India in accordance with Article 5 of the India-USA Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement. (b) Business Connection in India in accordance with section 9 of the Income Tax Act. 2.1 That on facts

Sabre Inc, New Delhi vs. DCIT (International Taxation), New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 216/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Delhi09 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)

DCIT (International Taxation), New Delhi vs. M/S. Sabre Glbl Inc., Gurgaon

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 6731/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Delhi09 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)

Nira vs. Inh Kishoresinh Gehlot, Indiavs.CPC, Bangalore (Present Jurisdiction -Income Tax Officer, Ward 5(3)(2), Ahmedabad), Gujarat

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1068/AHD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1068/Ahd/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Niravsinh Kishoresinh Cpc बनाम/ Gehlot Bangalore Vs. Shivam Vasant Chowk, Present Jurisdiction - Dharmaj, Petlad Dist Income Tax Officer Anand, Anand, Gujarat Ward 5(3)(2), Ahmedabad 388430 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Ajtpg6241P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Balaji V., Ar अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Sushil Kumar Katiar, Sr. Dr 01/02/2024 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 08/02/2024 O R D E R Per Ms. Madhumita Roy - Jm: The Instant Appeal Filed At The Instance Of The Appellant Is Directed Against The Order Dated 26.10.2023 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -3, Chennai (‘Cit(A)’) Arising Out Of The Intimation Order Dated 20.03.2020 Passed By The Assessing Officer, Under Section 143(1) Of The Act For Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. We Have Heard The Rival Submissions Made By The Respective Parties & We Have Also Perused The Relevant Materials Available On Record.

For Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Katiar, Sr. DR

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

earned by the appellant in Australia is not to be paid in India as the same would be paid twice. In order to avoid double taxation on salary income for the period commencing from 27th November, 2017 to 31st March, 2018, the appellant claimed Foreign Tax Credit ... tune of Rs.6,38,960/- for taxes already paid in Australia as per Section 90 read with Article 24(4) of the India- Australia Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (‘DTAA’) read with CBDT Circular 333 dated 2nd April, 1982. The appellant in support of such claim of FTC filed Form No.67

M/S Six Continents Hotels Inc., Gurgaon vs. The Dy CIT Circle-4(2)(1), International Taxation, Mumbai

ITA 6657/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: S/Shri S.K. Aggarwal a/w Siddesh Chaugule

Section 250Section 9(1)(vi)

Indian hotels is neither taxable as Royalty under section 9(1)(vi) of the Act nor under Article 12(3) of the India - USA Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement ('DTAA'). 1.4 On the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating

M/S Six Continents Hotels Inc., Gurgaon vs. Dy CIT Circle 4 (2)(1)(Inter National Taxation), Mumbai

ITA 6656/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: S/Shri S.K. Aggarwal a/w Siddesh ChauguleFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sant

Section 250Section 9(1)(vi)

Six Continents Hotels Inc., Gurgaon vs. Dy CIT Circle- 4 (2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee for the assessment year 2012-

ITA 6655/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: S/Shri S.K. Aggarwal a/w Siddesh ChauguleFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sant

Section 250Section 9(1)(vi)

Six Continents Hotels, Inc, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) - 4(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee for the assessment year 2012-

ITA 3662/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: S/Shri S.K. Aggarwal a/w Siddesh ChauguleFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sant

Section 250Section 9(1)(vi)

Rajesh Kumar Lakhran, Jaipur vs. ITO, WD-7(1), Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 761/JPR/2023[AY 2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Feb 2024

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Jagdish Choudhary (Proxy)For Respondent: Sh. Monisha Choudhary (Addl.CIT)

Section 154Section 90

have accepted TDS as sufficient evidences have been allowing the relief u/s-90 (FTC rule 128(9). 3. As per the provisions of the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement of INDIA and BELGIUM country, Stated that if a resident of India derives income which, in accordance with the provisions of the Agreement ... assessee has already suffered the tax at Belgium on the income offered in India and considering the double taxation agreement between India and Belgium the claim should be allowed to the assessee. 6. Per contra, the ld. DR representing the revenue has relied upon the reasoning which is again confirmed

Ntt Global Data Centers & Cloud Infrastructure India Private Limited (Erstwhile Netmagic It Services Private Limited), Mumbai vs. DCIT-10 (3)(1), Mumbai

In the result the issue under consideration is remitted back to the file of Assessing Officer for statistical purpose

ITA 2784/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blentt Global Data Centers & Cloud V. National E-Assessment Centre Infrastructure India Private Limited {Now Known As National {Erstwhile Netmagic It Services Faceless Appeal Centre} Private Limited} Delhi 7Th Floor, Hiranandani Business Park Sakinaka S.O., Mumbai - 400072 Pan: Aaccn2366D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Vijay Mehta, Shri Arpit Doshi & Ms. Payal Mehta Department Represented By : Shri S. Srinivasu

Section 37(1)

taxes paid by the Appellant in country outside India in respect of the fees for technical services and thereby subjecting the same income to double taxation alleging non-submission of relevant clauses of tax treaties and this being a consequential ground without appreciating that the Appellant had in fact made ... Central Government has entered into a double tax avoidance agreement with Japan ("India- Japan tax treaty) for granting relief in respect of double taxation of income. As per section 90(2) of the Act, the assessee can take benefit of treaty provisions if it is more beneficial. Page

Samveg Bhandari, Indore vs. Income Tax Officer, Delhi

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

ITA 291/IND/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Feb 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanisamveg Bhandari Ito- Nfac Bunglow No.1, Shalimar Delhi Township Vs. Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Ajfpb 6700N Assessee By Shri Subhash Chand Jain, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 05.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 06.02.2024

Section 143(1)Section 154

while processing return of income u/s 143(1) has added the same amount again to the business income of the assessee which has resulted double taxation of the said income of Rs.5,11,862/-. He has referred to the return of income as well as the order passed ... pointed out that to rectify the said mistake of double taxation of the said income the assesse filed a petition u/s 154 of the Act before CPC which was disposed off vide order dated 08.11.2022 but the mistake was not rectified in the said order and therefore, the assesse filed

Corning Sas India Branch Office, Haryana vs. DCIT/ACIT-Int-Tax, Haryana

The appeal of the assessee is allowed as above

ITA 528/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu Before Shri G.S. Pannu & Before Shri G.S. Pannu Before Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Kul Bharat Kul Bharat Kul Bharatkul Bharat Shri Shri Shri

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora, CAFor Respondent: Shri Bhuvnesh Kulshresth, CIT-DR &

Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(13)Section 270

refund received by the Appellant, being a tax resident of France, by application of the Most Favoured Nation ('MFN') clause contained in India-France Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement ('DTAA') read with the restricted scope of taxation of 'Interest' under Article 12 of the India-Italy DTAA, wherein any interest received

New Skies Satellites B.V., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Circle-2(2)(2), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2944/DEL/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2020-21] New Skies Satellites B.V., Vs Dcit, C/O-Ernst & Young Llp, Golf Cirlce-2(2)(2), View Corporate Tower, Tower-B, International Taxation, Sector-42, Gurgaon, New Delhi. Haryana-122002. Pan-Aaccn1866C Appellant Respondent Appellant By Ms. Ananya Bajpayee, Adv. Respondent By Shri Bhuvnesh Kulshrestha, Cit Dr & Shri Om Prakash, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 12.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 06.02.2024

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2Section 234ASection 270ASection 9(1)(vi)

Segment Capacity are assessable as business profits in India and in the absence of a Permanent Establishment under Article 5 of the India-Netherlands Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between India and Netherlands ('the DTAA'), the receipts earned by the Appellant are not taxable in India. 2. That on the facts ... company, incorporated under the laws of the Netherlands and is a tax resident of the Netherlands in terms of Article 4 of the Double taxation Avoidance Agreement (“DTAA”) between India and Netherlands. The assessee provides transmission services of voice, data and programmes by provision of space segment capacity on Satellites

Yes Bank Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT(2)(2)(2), Mumbai

ITA 4278/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

Section 14ASection 251Section 35DSection 8D(2)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND MS. KAVITHA

ACIT - 2(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Yes Bank Limited, Mumbai

ITA 3017/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Acit-2(2)(2), Room No. 545, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400020. Appellant Yes Bank Ltd., 15Th Floor, Yes Bank Tower, Ifc 2, Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphistone (West), Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Aaacy 2068 D Appellant Assessee By Revenue By Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement

Section 14ASection 251Section 35DSection 8D(2)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G” MUMBΑΙ BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND MS. KAVITHA

Sarva Capital Llc, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle International Tax 3(1)(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2073/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Feb 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Nirbhay Mehta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Vizay B.Vasanta, CIT-DR

Section 112Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 270A

ground Nos. 4, 5 and 5.1, the assessee has raised the common issue with reference to applicability of beneficial provisions of India-Mauritius Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) to the income earned under the head ‘capital gain’. In addition to the aforesaid grounds, the assessee has raised an 4 Sarva ... liability to tax in Mauritius due to exemption in capital gain income under the domestic laws of Mauritius, cannot claim benefits of avoidance of double taxation. In our 10 Sarva Capital LLC view, this issue has also been addressed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Azadi Bachao Andolan

Honda Motorcycle and Scooter India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1), Gurugram

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1524/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Sh. Harpreet Singh Ajmani, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 92C

dividends paid to the shareholders in Japan and Thailand would be subject to the beneficial rate provided 25 under India-Japan and India-Thailand Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement. The departmental authorities, however, rejected assessee’s claim by stating that such claim cannot be entertained as it was not made either

Akshay Rangraoji Umale, Pune vs. DCIT, Circle 12 Pune, Pune

The appeal of the assessee is ALLOWED in above terms

ITA 1428/PUN/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Feb 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 1428/Pun/2023 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2019-19 Akshay Rangroji Umale A-402, Pride Panorama, Shivaji Hsg. Society, Sb Road, Pune-411016 Pan: Aampu7528K . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Mr Kishor Phadke [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Ms Sonal Sonkavde [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 5Section 6(1)Section 90

inter alia, empowers the Central Government of India [for brevity ‘GOI’] to enter into a DTAA with other countries for avoidance of double taxation and for granting relief in respect of income on which tax has been paid or income tax is chargeable both in India and the foreign country

Vishwanathareddy Chennareddy, Bangalore vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-2(2)(7), Bengaluru

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

ITA 900/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI (Accountant Member), SMT. BEENA PILLAI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Hemasundara Rao P., A.RFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian S., D.R

Section 250Section 251Section 68Section 69A

submitted that upholding the additions made by the learned Assessing Officer under section 69A of the Act for cash credits will amount to double taxation in the hands of the Assessee as the same was already offered as Professional receipts. 5.11 The ld. A.R. further submitted that the learned Assessing ... cash deposited by the Assessee in the bank account during the demonetization period stating it as unexplained credits. He submitted that it amounts to double taxation since the said cash deposits were out of the Assessee's professional receipts which were already offered to tax by the Assessee. Hence

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), International Taxation, Bengaluru, Bangalore vs. Tata Communication (Uk) Limited, United Kingdom

In the result, Revenue’s appeals and the COs of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 865/BANG/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Feb 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuit(It)A Nos.864, 865/Bang/2023 Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-11 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. M/S. Tata Communications (Uk) Ltd., Circle -2(2), International Taxation, Vintners Place, 68 Upper Thames, Bengaluru. Street London Ec4V3Bj, United Kingdom - 999999. Pan : Aahct 0782 C Appellant Respondent C.O.Nos.2, 3/Bang/2024 (In It(It)A Nos. 864, 865/Bang/2023) Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-11 M/S. Tata Communictions (Uk) Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vintners Place, 68 Upper Thames, Circle -2(2), International Taxation, Street London Ec4V3Bj, Bengaluru. United Kingdom - 999999. Pan : Aahct 0782 C Cross Objector Respondent Appellant By : Shri. Ketan Ved, Ca Respondent By : Ms. Neera Malhotra, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 01.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 01.02.2024 O R D E R Per Bench : These Appeals At The Instance Of The Department & Cross- Objections (Co) By The Assessee Are Directed Against Two Orders Of Cit(A)

For Appellant: Shri. Ketan Ved, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 201Section 9Section 9(1)(vi)

section 201 of the Act, the said charges were considered as Royalty / Fees for Technical Services (FTS) as per the Act and the respective Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA). 4. Since the income was deemed to have been accrue / arise under section 9 of the Act in the hands