← 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

Kyocera Document Solutions Asia Limited, Hong Kong vs. ACIT Circle Int Tax 2(1)(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 380/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Nethrapal, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

company incorporated in Hong Kong and is a tax resident of Hong Kong under the provisions of Article 4 of India-Hong Kong Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement ('DTAA'). Page 2 of 27 ITA No. 380, 3546/DEL/2023 & 1664/DEL/2025 [A.Y 2020-21, 2021-22 & 2022-23] Kyocera Document Solutions Asia Vs. ACIT

Kyocera Document Solutions Asia Ltd., (Formerly Known As Kyocera Mita Asia Limited), Hong Kong vs. ACIT, Circle International Tax 2(1)(2), Delhi

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

ITA 3546/DEL/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Nethrapal, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

company incorporated in Hong Kong and is a tax resident of Hong Kong under the provisions of Article 4 of India-Hong Kong Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement ('DTAA'). Page 2 of 27 ITA No. 380, 3546/DEL/2023 & 1664/DEL/2025 [A.Y 2020-21, 2021-22 & 2022-23] Kyocera Document Solutions Asia Vs. ACIT

Nilesh Pravinchandra Doshi, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 42(1)(3), Mumbai, Maharashtra

ITA 8368/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarnilesh Pravinchandra Ito Ward 42(1)(3), Doshi Kautilya Bhavan, B/29, Pushpanjali Vs. Bandra Kurla Building, Jambli Gully, Complex, Bandra Borivali West, Mumbai- East, 400 092 Mumbai-400 051 Pan/Gir No. Amcpd6391D (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Jay Shah, Ld. Ar Revenue By Shri Surendra Mohan, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 08.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 12.01.2026

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 50CSection 56(2)(vii)

source. The assessee thus contended that the entire interest income stood duly accounted for and taxed, and that the proposed addition would result in double taxation of the same income. 17. The Assessing Officer, however, rejected the explanation of the assessee on the ground that, on perusal of the bank ... either already been offered to tax in the immediately preceding assessment year or has otherwise been duly accounted results in double taxation. This claim rests on factual verification of the return of income, computation, and Form 26AS of A.Y. 2016–17, which has not been examined either by the Assessing

Bhola Prasad, Gaya vs. Income Tax Officer, Gaya

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

ITA 339/PAT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna09 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.339/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Bhola Prasad..………………….………………. …………………....Appellant Manpur Ptwatoli Durga Asthan, Gaya, Bihar-823001.. [Pan: Auzpp5136D] Vs. Ito, Gaya…………..………..…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Jitendra Kr. Sinha, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Md. A H Chowdhury Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 05, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 09, 2026 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 23.05.2025 Passed By The Nfac, Delhi U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’) For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing & Trading Of Textile. For The Assessment Year 2017–18, The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income Declaring Total Income Of ₹3,10,520. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Cass On Account Of High-Value Cash Deposits During The Demonetisation Period, As Reported Through Third-Party Information. Notices Under Section 143(2) Followed By Notices Under Section 142(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 Were Issued. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, It Was Noticed That Cash Deposits Aggregating To ₹97,64,000, Predominantly In

Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 44ASection 69

third party has owned up the transactions, the same income cannot be taxed in the hands of the assessee, as this would result in double taxation of the same income. 5. On the other hand, the Ld. DR relied upon the orders of the lower authorities but fairly conceded that

Harish Chandra Purohit, Ratlam vs. Income Tax Officer - 1, Ratlam

In the result- the Impugned order is set aside as and by way

ITA 221/IND/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore09 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshiassessment Year: 2018-19

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 253Section 69A

income filed by the assessee and thus, the addition of Rs. 14,64,000/-u/s. 69A r.w.s 115BBE of the Act would lead to double taxation and the addition is wrong and contrary to the facts of the case and provisions of the Act and is liable to be deleted ... taxes on the surrendered income. It was also stated that it is part & parcel of the business income realised from the business debtors & hence double taxation. The assessee has no books of accounts. Attention was invited to P11 Q9 of PB. It is unexplained debtor’s income recovered basis diary

ACIT-1(1), Indore vs. Kriti Nutrients Limited, Indore

The appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical

ITA 780/IND/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Indore09 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

Section 246ASection 250Section 253

hence its reversal at the comnggncement of A.Y. 2021-22 in the books of account was an allowable expenditure. Its disallowance has resulted into double taxation i.e. in A.Y. 2020-21 as well in A-Y. 2021- 22; Page 47 of 107 Kriti Nutrients Ltd. ITA No. 780/Ind/2024 ... Once the total income having been considered as per such intimation, by making again addition of Rs.4,46,360/- resulted into double taxation on the same amount which is unjustified, improper, bad in law and additions so made deserves to be quashed. VII) Payment of leave encashment The company

Kp Advisory Services LLP, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 1013/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1013/Hyd/2025 Assessment Year 2018-2019 Kp Advisory Services Llp, The Acit, Hyderabad. Pin–500 016. Vs. Central Circle-2(1), Telangana. Hyderabad. Pan Aarfk7349F (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Sri Sp Chidambaram, Advocate राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Sri Ashutosh Pradhan, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 10.12.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 09.01.2026 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Sri SP Chidambaram, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri Ashutosh Pradhan, Sr. AR
Section 10(34)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234ASection 270A

Assessee at Bar the ground no.3 of assessee’s appeal is dismissed being not pressed. 10. Ground no.4 of assessee’s appeal is regarding double taxation of short-term capital gain. 11. Learned Counsel for the Assessee has submitted that the assessee has offered short term capital gain ... year under consideration. However, the said income was already assessed by the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2017-2018 which has resulted double taxation of the same income. Learned Counsel for the Assessee has pointed out that at the time of filing the return of income for the year

Kalpana Nitin Shah, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 19(2)(2), Mumbai

ITA 7012/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

For Appellant: Shri Harshad M. Karnik, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 151Section 194Section 271(1)(c)

security for the company's loan from the bank. 7. That the lower authorities erred in law by making an addition which leads to double taxation of the same income, as the interest earned on the said Fixed Deposit has been offered to tax by Hiraco Jewellery

Jankalyan Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Mar Shahapur, Shahapur vs. DCIT Circle 1, Kalyan

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

ITA 6301/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

Section 139Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(c)

were made in accordance with the Co-operative Societies Act; « the restriction of deduction under section 80P was erroneous; and « the assessment resulted in double taxation of the same income. 7. The CIT(A) recorded that during the appellate proceedings, the assessee filed only the grounds of appeal and statement

ACIT (It)- Circle, New Delhi vs. Air France, Delhi

ITA 5311/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 250

that even if the "Collection Charges" are considered as income of the assessee company, the same shall be covered under Article 8 of the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between India and France and as such exempt in India from taxation as the same is part of the business ... aircrafts and other services were not offered to tax in India on the plea that they are exempt under Article 8 of India-France Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA). 6. The Learned AR fairly submitted that the grounds raised by the assessee in its appeal are covered against the assessee

ACIT, Delhi vs. Air France, Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 5310/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 250

that even if the "Collection Charges" are considered as income of the assessee company, the same shall be covered under Article 8 of the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between India and France and as such exempt in India from taxation as the same is part of the business ... aircrafts and other services were not offered to tax in India on the plea that they are exempt under Article 8 of India-France Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA). 6. The Learned AR fairly submitted that the grounds raised by the assessee in its appeal are covered against the assessee

Air France, Delhi vs. DCIT Circle-1 (1) (10, Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 5206/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 250

that even if the "Collection Charges" are considered as income of the assessee company, the same shall be covered under Article 8 of the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between India and France and as such exempt in India from taxation as the same is part of the business ... aircrafts and other services were not offered to tax in India on the plea that they are exempt under Article 8 of India-France Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA). 6. The Learned AR fairly submitted that the grounds raised by the assessee in its appeal are covered against the assessee

Air France, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1(1)(1), Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 5205/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 250

that even if the "Collection Charges" are considered as income of the assessee company, the same shall be covered under Article 8 of the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between India and France and as such exempt in India from taxation as the same is part of the business ... aircrafts and other services were not offered to tax in India on the plea that they are exempt under Article 8 of India-France Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA). 6. The Learned AR fairly submitted that the grounds raised by the assessee in its appeal are covered against the assessee

Harjeet Kaur, Uttar Pradesh vs. Circle 5(1)(1), G B Nagar, Uttar Pradesh

The appeal is allowed and the

ITA 2731/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalharjeet Kaur Vs. Circle 5(1)(1) S-004, F Block, Omax Income Tax Department Queen, Gautam Buddha Gb Nagar Nagar, Uttar Pradesh Uttar Pradesh – 201307 201301 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Azzpk6790P Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Ravi Pratap Mall, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swaroop, CIT, DR
Section 144Section 68

merely around Rs.5,00,000/-. The cash deposits being duly reflected in the cash sales if allowed to be added would result in double taxation. 13.2 As with regard to rejection of books of account and net profit assumption of the relevant evidence of books of account and branch ledgers

Fcs Computer Systems S Pte Ltd, India vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle Int Tax 1(3)(1), India

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1034/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarfcs Computer Systems S Pte Ltd, Vs. Acit, Office No. 07, 5Th Floor, A-40, I- International Taxation- Thum Tower-C, Sector-62, Up 1(3)(1), Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaacf7319J Assessee By : Shri Ashwani Taneja, Adv Shri Divyansh Dubery, Adv Shri Shivam Kukreja, Adv Ms. Ria Toyal, Adv Revenue By: Ms. Ekta Jain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 04/12/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 09/01/2026

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Taneja, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Ekta Jain, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C

remitting the payment to the branch office. The branch being a Permanent Establishment (PE) in India as per Article 5 of the India - Singapore Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA), the Assessee has been offering the FCS Computer Systems S PTE Ltd income attributable to the PE in India and filing ... Computer Systems S PTE Ltd 25(1) and Article 7(3) operate in different situations. While Article 25(1) deals with elimination of double taxation, Article 7 deals with taxability of business profits and paragraph 3 of Article 7 lays down the mechanism of computation of business profit

Linkedin Technology Information Private Limited, Delhi vs. Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax, Delhi -4, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2492/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Sriram Seshadri, CAFor Respondent: Shri Nethrapal, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 195Section 263Section 40

would have to do when they find that the provision of a DTAA treaty is not in conformity with the Act.: ―Thus, where a Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement provided for a particular mode of computation of income, the same should be followed, irrespective of the provision of the Income

Manish Pahwa, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 45(2), New Delhi

The appeal is partly allowed with consequences to follow as

ITA 3270/DEL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shuklaassessment Year: 2011-12 Manish Pahwa, Vs Ito, J-554, Rajouri Garden, Ward-45(2), New Delhi– 110 027. Delhi. Pan: Aaapp0676M

For Appellant: Shri Nitin Gulati, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Ankush Kalra, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 69Section 69C

suppression of turnover. The profit from these cash fees has been duly offered to tax. Adding the same cash as unexplained would amount to double taxation of the business income. The Revenue did not point out any specific deficiency in the cash book (e.g., no 12 instance of cash

Punyashila Automobiles, Hoshangabad vs. ITO2, Itarsi

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 476/IND/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore08 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri B.M. Biyani**

Section 143(1)Section 250Section 40

offered such amount for taxation in their income tax return of concerned financial year. Again raising demand on the same amount will result in double taxation.* - *4. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law as this mistake was apparent from record. And this was raised

Gurdas Mal Arora, Kanpur vs. The A O Circle-1(2)(1), Kanpur

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

ITA 412/LKW/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow08 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshragurdas Mal Arora V. The Assessing Officer, 21/L/4, Daboli, Circle-1(2)(1) Kanpur. 16/69, Aayakar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Kanpur- 208001. Pan:Afepm4342J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, Advocate Respondent By: Shri Amit Kumar, Cit-Dr O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amit Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 68Section 69A

confirming addition of Rs.1,93,48,000/- u/s 68 of the IT Act, 1961 rws 115BBE of the IT Act, 1961 leading to double taxation as the cash deposit has already been considered in the return of income. Page 2 of 35 5. That the Id. CIT(A) has erred ... accepted the same and has made partial rejection of books of account to the extent cash deposited. Such addition made would lead to double taxation as the sale has been offered to tax and accepted by the Id.AO while making addition to the return of income and computing the assessed

Pandian Hari, Chennai vs. The Income Tax Officer, Chennai

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

ITA 2628/CHNY/2025[2023-2024]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jan 2026AY 2023-2024

Bench: Shri George George Kand Ms Padmavathy Sआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2628/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2023-24 Shri Pandian Hari, 75/151 I Om Sri Sairam Plaza, Thambuchetty Street, Parrys, Chennai - 600 001. Pan: Acfph 7870Q (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/Appellant By : Dr.S. Sankar Ganesh, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Addl.Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 07.01.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08.01.2026 आदेश/Order Per George George K: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Dated 05.08.2025 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called 'The Act'). The Relevant Assessment Year Is 2023-24. :- 2 -:

For Appellant: Dr.S. Sankar Ganesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69A

income of the earlier year, there shall be no addition of said sum in the current assessment year since addition would tantamount to double taxation. It is ordered accordingly. Accordingly, this issue raised in Ground No.4 is allowed for statistical purposes. 13. In the result, the appeal filed