“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

Clementine Fernandes, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 2(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 5569/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 250Section 253(4)Section 68

violating Article 265 of the Constitution of India which prohibits levy of tax except by authority of law and creating an unconstitutional scenario of double taxation on the same transaction. 3. The learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts by dismissing the reconciliation evidence and documentary proof without ... from the CIT(A), the appellant recognized the need for professional legal assistance given the complex nature of the case involving joint account transactions, double taxation issues, and technical legal arguments under section 68 of the Act. The appellant commenced the process of identifying and appointing competent tax counsel with

Jeppesen Gmbh, Germany vs. ACIT, Internation Taxation, Circle-3(1)(1), Mumbai, Maharashtra

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

ITA 1337/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Us Read As Under:

Section 10(50)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 9(1)(vi)

under the laws of the Federal Republic of Germany and is a tax resident of Germany within the meaning of Article 4 of the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between India and Germany. The assessee was incorporated in 1934 and has since been engaged in the specialised business of providing flight ... transfer of any experience by GIA to the clients. The term "experience" is not defined either under the Act or under the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement and consequently we shall have to consider the normal dictionary meaning. The expression "experience" in The Oxford English Reference Dictionary has been explained

ACIT., Central Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Nethi Ravi, Hyderabad

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

ITA 594/HYD/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.594/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22) Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Shri Nethi Ravi Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle 2(2) Pan:Adbpn7597F Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Ravi Bharadawaj, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri S. Arun Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 16/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 24/12/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.:

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Bharadawaj, CAFor Respondent: : Shri S. Arun Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 24Section 69A

Revenue from various persons including the assessee. It was submitted that taxing the same cash in the hands of the assessee would result in double taxation, which is impermissible under law. Accordingly, the Ld. AR prayed to uphold the order of the Ld. CIT (A). 7. We have carefully considered

Nisar Ebrahim Ookabhoy, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 16(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 6638/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

Section 143(1)Section 199Section 205

mismatch of credit due to non payment by the deductor. These directions are binding on the Department and are intended precisely to avoid double taxation of an innocent deductee. 21. The judicial current flows in the same channel. The jurisdictional High Court in Yashpal Sahni v. Rekha Hajarnavis held that

Income-Tax Officer - 12(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Blues It Innovations India Private Limited, Mumbai

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

ITA 6465/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 234ASection 254(1)Section 69C

assessee has included purchases in computing sales and closing stock then taxing on full amount of purchases under section 69C would result in double taxation and distortion of gross profit ratio and directed the AO to verify sale and closing stock details and restrict the disallowance only to the profit

Blues It Innovations India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO - 12(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 6300/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 234ASection 254(1)Section 69C

Blues It Innovations India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO -12(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 6299/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 234ASection 254(1)Section 69C

Blues It Innovations India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO - 12(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 6298/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 234ASection 254(1)Section 69C

Blues It Innovations India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO - 12(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 6297/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 234ASection 254(1)Section 69C

Asia Today Ltd, Mumbai vs. ADIT (It) 2(2), Mumbai

In the result, Assessee's appeal is allowed

ITA 1403/MUM/2008[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Dec 2025AY 2004-2005

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Omkareshwar Chidaraassessment Year: 2004-05 M/S. Asia Today Limited, Asst. Director Of Income C/O. Zee Entertainment Enterprises Tax (International Ltd., Vs. Taxation)-2(2), 135, Dr. Annie Besant Road, Scindia House, Worli, Mumbai – 400 018 Bellard Estate, Pan: Aabca0249F Mumbai - 400039 (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Niraj Sheth, Ld. A.R. Revenue By : Shri Krishna Kumar, Ld. Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 10.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.12.2025 O R D E R Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 25.01.2007, Impugned Herein, Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (In Short Ld. Commissioner) U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) For The A.Y. 2004-05. 2. The Relevant Facts For Adjudication Of This Appeal Are As Under: The Assessee, Being A Foreign Telecasting Company Incorporated In Mauritius & Having Tax Residency Certificate Of Mauritius , During The Ay Under Consideration Was Engaged In The Production & Acquiring Rights Of Various Television Films Including Feature Films, As A Copy Right Owner/Holder Of Various Hindi Feature Films Produced & Censored In India, As Mentioned In Schedule ‘C’ Annexed With The ‘Agreement Of 2 M/S Asia Today Ltd. Vs Asst. Dit (Int. Taxation)-2(2)

For Appellant: Shri Niraj Sheth, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Ld. Sr. D.R

Section 250Section 9(1)(vi)

correct in not treating M/s Multi Screen Media Pvt. Ltd. (MSM India as Permanent establishment of the assessee in terms of Article 5 of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between India and Singapore? c. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT erred ... case where payment of any copyright in literary, artistic or scientific work was being made. 14. We may also notice that India Singapore Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement contains Article 12 pertaining to royalty and fees for technical service. Paragraph (3) of Article 12 defines the term "Royalty" as under

Punch Ratna Fasteners Private Limited, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle 19(1), Delhi

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

ITA 4066/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2018-19] Punch Ratna Fasters Vs Acit Pvt.Ltd., 4/8 Third Floor, Circle-19(1) East Punjabi Bagh, Delhi Delhi-110026. Pan-Aaacp1316M Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Naveen Gupta, Adv. & Shri Nakul Gupta, Adv. Respondent By Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 24.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.12.2025 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Present Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Order Dated 16.05.2025 By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A), Meerut [“Ld.Cit(A)”] In Appeal No. 288/2013-14 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Dated 17.02.2021 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 143(3A) & 143(3B) Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Company Is Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing Of Cold & Hot Forged Automotive Components & Fasteners & Had Filed Its Return Of Income On 28.10.2018, Declaring Total Income Of Inr 28,88,88,610/-. Subsequently, The Said Return Of Income Was Selected For Complete Scrutiny Under Cass For The Issues Namely, (I) Expenditure Of Personal Nature & (Ii) Foreign Financial Interest. Subsequently, Notice U/S 143(2) Of The Act Was Served Upon The Assessee On 22.09.2019. Thereafter, Notices U/S 142(1) Of The Income-Tax Act 1961 Were Issued, In Response To Which, The Assessee Submitted Copies Of Relevant Documents & Explanations Online Through E- Filing Portal. After Considering The Submissions Made By The Assessee & All Relevant Materials Available On Record, Income Of The Assessee Was Assessed At Inr 29,16,01,890/- Vide Assessment Order Dated 17.02.2021 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act.

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 37

already disallowed and added back by the appellant in its income while filing its return of income. Hence the addition made resulted in double taxation of the same amount. 3. That the Ld. CIT (Appeals) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 10,82,481/- made

Sms Group Gmbh, Delhi vs. ACIT.Circle-3(1)(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 377/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri M. S. Nethrapal, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

section 9(1)(vii) of the Act since the income herein was “FTS”and was not entitled for any relief under the India – Germany Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement “DTAA”. We are informed during the course of hearing that the main dispute(s) between both the parties in the assessee

Sms Group Gmbh, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle 3(1)(2), International Txation, New Delhi

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

ITA 993/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri M. S. Nethrapal, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

Sms Group Gmbh, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle - 3(1)(2) Intl. Taxation, New Delhi

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

ITA 3297/DEL/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri M. S. Nethrapal, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

Sms Group Gmbh, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-3(1)(2) Int. Taxation, New Delhi

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

ITA 1592/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri M. S. Nethrapal, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

Sms Group Gmbh, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-3(1)(2), Int. Taxation, New Delhi

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

ITA 1591/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri M. S. Nethrapal, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

Magnifique Gems Private Limited, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1)(4), Surat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed partly

ITA 691/SRT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat23 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2017-18 Magnifique Gems Private Limited Income Tax Officer, 105 Rajshree Building, Maniyara Ward-1(1)(4) Sheri Na Naka, Surat, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan Income Tax Gujarat- 395003 Colony, Athwa, Surat, Gujarat- 395001 Pan No. Aagcm 5160 N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Rasesh Shah, Ca Revenue By : Mr. J.K. Chandani, Sr-Dr

For Appellant: Mr. Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Mr. J.K. Chandani, Sr-DR

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 68

therefore income generated through this gets automatically offered for taxation. Any further ad hoc addition on account of cash deposit will tantamount to double taxation in the hands of the appellant company. Taxing the sales which were credited in the Books of accounts and again making the addition on account ... sales as genuine sales then the credit for the sales offered for taxation by the assessee should be given in order to avoid the double taxation of the same income, This right of the assessee cannot be denied at any cost and needed to be considered

Mahendra Kumar Pandya, Indore vs. DCIT/ACIT 1(1), Ind, Indore

ITA 343/IND/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Ms. Shreya Jain, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 90Section 91

overseas Income is included in the total income, the assessee is entitle for relief of overseas taxes paid under section 90 as per applicable double taxation avoidance agreement, if any, or for appropriate tax relief under section 91 of the Act in case there are no such agreements in existence ... credit merely on the ground of delay in filing Form No. 67 was unjustified and contrary to the provisions of the Act and the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement. The learned CIT(Appeals), however, dismissed the appeal of the assessee. The CIT(Appeals) held that as per Mahendra Kumar Pandya

Lingannagari Parinitha, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Ward-11(4), Hyderabad

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

ITA 990/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: CA, Rajnish PissayFor Respondent: Sri Gudimella V P Pavan Kumar, Sr. AR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250Section 69A

stated by the Assessing Officer has been added again to the assessed income, which is an error apparent from the record and leads to double taxation. He submitted that the total of the credits made by the assessee during the assessment year 2017-201 into

Lajayems Jewellers Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle 5(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the ground of appeal raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 197/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawallajayems Jewellers Private Limited, Assistant Commissioner Of G-28, Simla House, Nepean Sea Vs. Income Tax, Circle 5 (2) (2), Road, Mumbai - 400036 Mumbai - 400020. Pan – Aaacl 1458 J (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Ms. Dinkle H. Hariya - Advocate Revenue By : Shri Bhagirath Ramawat, Sr. D.R. Date Of Institution Of Appeal : 10.01.2025 Date Of Hearing : 17.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 23..12.2025 Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act Per : Pawan Singh: 1. This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Cit (A) Dated 13.12.2024 Vide Assessment Year 2017-18. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

For Appellant: Ms. Dinkle H. Hariya - AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Bhagirath Ramawat, SR. D.R

Section 131Section 133ASection 250Section 254(1)

Rs.6,00,000/- of cash deposit declared under PGMKY, if this amount is not reduced form the total income, it will amount to double taxation. As the Assessee has already declared/ offered Rs.6,00,000/- in PMGKY. 6. On the other hand, the Ld. Sr. DR. for the Revenue supported