← 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

Chanchalben Dahyabhai Patel, Daman vs. Income Tax Officer, Daman

ITA 1038/SRT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat09 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1035-1038/Srt/2024 (Ays: 2011-12, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) (Hybrid Hearing) Chanchalben Dahyabhai Patel 40, A.Dabhel Ghelwad Faila, Nani, Daman-396 210 Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-Daman, Jeevanji Hotel Building, Kathiria, Devka Road, Nani Daman-396 210 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aljpp 3816 D (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धारिती की ओर से /Appellant By Shri Chandra Jha, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 26/03/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement | 09/06/2025 आदेश / Order Per Bijayananda Pruseth, Am: These Four Appeals By The Assessee Emanate From Separate Orders Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, 'The Act') By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi/Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) [In Short, “Nfac/Cit(E)”] All Dated 13.08.2024, For The Assessment Years (Ay) 2011-12, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16, Which In Turn Arose Out Of Assessment Orders Passed By Assessing Officer (In Short, ‘Ao') U/S 147 R.W.S. 144 R.W.S.144B Of The Act On 26.12.2018, 25.03.2022 & 28.03.2022 Respectively. In All The Appeals, The Facts Are Common & Grounds Of Appeals Raised By The Assessee Are Similar Except Variance Of Amounts. Hence, With The Consent Of The Parties, All The Appeals Were Clubbed & Heard Together & Are Decided By This Consolidated Order For Sake Of Convenience & Brevity.

Section 147Section 250

income. These receipts were already considered as income at the time of making addition of credit entries. This is again the case of DOUBLE TAXATION. 7. In para 15 of the assessment order there is an addition of Rs.15,75,764. This income is already taxed in para ... para 10 of the order. This fig is clearly showing in the profit and loss account as income. This is again the case of DOUBLE TAXATION. 8. In para 16 of the assessment order thee is an addition of Rs.60,37,040 as profit from sale of shares. These receipts

Chanchalben Dahyabhai Patel, Daman vs. Income Tax Officer, Daman

ITA 1037/SRT/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat09 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1035-1038/Srt/2024 (Ays: 2011-12, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) (Hybrid Hearing) Chanchalben Dahyabhai Patel Income Tax Officer, Ward-Daman, 40, A.Dabhel Ghelwad Faila, बनाम / Jeevanji Hotel Building, Kathiria, Nani, Daman-396 210 Vs. Devka Road, Nani Daman-396 210 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aljpp 3816 D (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धारिती की ओर से /Appellant By Shri Chandra Jha, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 26/03/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement | 09/06/2025 आदेश / Order Per Bijayananda Pruseth, Am: These Four Appeals By The Assessee Emanate From Separate Orders Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, 'The Act') By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi/Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) [In Short, “Nfac/Cit(E)”] All Dated 13.08.2024, For The Assessment Years (Ay) 2011-12, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16, Which In Turn Arose Out Of Assessment Orders Passed By Assessing Officer (In Short, ‘Ao') U/S 147 R.W.S. 144 R.W.S.144B Of The Act On 26.12.2018, 25.03.2022 & 28.03.2022 Respectively. In All The Appeals, The Facts Are Common & Grounds Of Appeals Raised By The Assessee Are Similar Except Variance Of Amounts. Hence, With The Consent Of The Parties, All The Appeals Were Clubbed & Heard Together & Are Decided By This Consolidated Order For Sake Of Convenience & Brevity.

Section 147Section 250

income. These receipts were already considered as income at the time of making addition of credit entries. This is again the case of DOUBLE TAXATION. 7. In para 15 of the assessment order there is an addition of Rs.15,75,764. This income is already taxed in para ... para 10 of the order. This fig is clearly showing in the profit and loss account as income. This is again the case of DOUBLE TAXATION. 8. In para 16 of the assessment order thee is an addition of Rs.60,37,040 as profit from sale of shares. These receipts

Chanchalben Dahyabhai Patel, Daman vs. ITO, Daman

ITA 1036/SRT/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat09 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1035-1038/Srt/2024 (Ays: 2011-12, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) (Hybrid Hearing) Chanchalben Dahyabhai Patel Income Tax Officer, Ward-Daman, 40, A.Dabhel Ghelwad Faila, Vs. Jeevanji Hotel Building, Kathiria, Nani, Daman-396 210 Devka Road, Nani Daman-396 210 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aljpp 3816 D (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धारिती की ओर से /Appellant By Shri Chandra Jha, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 26/03/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 09/06/2025 आदेश / Order Per Bijayananda Pruseth, Am: These Four Appeals By The Assessee Emanate From Separate Orders Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, 'The Act') By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi/Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) [In Short, “Nfac/Cit(E)”] All Dated 13.08.2024, For The Assessment Years (Ay) 2011-12, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16, Which In Turn Arose Out Of Assessment Orders Passed By Assessing Officer (In Short, ‘Ao') U/S 147 R.W.S. 144 R.W.S.144B Of The Act On 26.12.2018, 25.03.2022 & 28.03.2022 Respectively. In All The Appeals, The Facts Are Common & Grounds Of Appeals Raised By The Assessee Are Similar Except Variance Of Amounts. Hence, With The Consent Of The Parties, All The Appeals Were Clubbed & Heard Together & Are Decided By This Consolidated Order For Sake Of Convenience & Brevity. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee For Different Years Are As Under:

Section 147Section 250

income. These receipts were already considered as income at the time of making addition of credit entries. This is again the case of DOUBLE TAXATION. 7. In para 15 of the assessment order there is an addition of Rs.15,75,764. This income is already taxed in para ... para 10 of the order. This fig is clearly showing in the profit and loss account as income. This is again the case of DOUBLE TAXATION. 8. In para 16 of the assessment order thee is an addition of Rs.60,37,040 as profit from sale of shares. These receipts

Chanchalben Dahyabhai Patel, Daman vs. Income Tax Officer, Daman

ITA 1035/SRT/2024[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Surat09 Jun 2025AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1035-1038/Srt/2024 (Ays: 2011-12, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) (Hybrid Hearing) Chanchalben Dahyabhai Patel Income Tax Officer, Ward-Daman, 40, A.Dabhel Ghelwad Faila, Vs. Jeevanji Hotel Building, Kathiria, Nani, Daman-396 210 Devka Road, Nani Daman-396 210 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aljpp 3816 D (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धारिती की ओर से /Appellant By Shri Chandra Jha, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 26/03/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement | 09/06/2025 आदेश / Order Per Bijayananda Pruseth, Am: These Four Appeals By The Assessee Emanate From Separate Orders Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, 'The Act') By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi/Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) [In Short, “Nfac/Cit(E)”] All Dated 13.08.2024, For The Assessment Years (Ay) 2011-12, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16, Which In Turn Arose Out Of Assessment Orders Passed By Assessing Officer (In Short, ‘Ao') U/S 147 R.W.S. 144 R.W.S.144B Of The Act On 26.12.2018, 25.03.2022 & 28.03.2022 Respectively. In All The Appeals, The Facts Are Common & Grounds Of Appeals Raised By The Assessee Are Similar Except Variance Of Amounts. Hence, With The Consent Of The Parties, All The Appeals Were Clubbed & Heard Together & Are Decided By This Consolidated Order For Sake Of Convenience & Brevity.

Section 147Section 250

income. These receipts were already considered as income at the time of making addition of credit entries. This is again the case of DOUBLE TAXATION. 7. In para 15 of the assessment order there is an addition of Rs.15,75,764. This income is already taxed in para ... para 10 of the order. This fig is clearly showing in the profit and loss account as income. This is again the case of DOUBLE TAXATION. 8. In para 16 of the assessment order thee is an addition of Rs.60,37,040 as profit from sale of shares. These receipts

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kollam vs. Allebasi Builders and Developers (P) Ltd, Attingal

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed and Revenue’s appeal and assessee’s cross objection stand dismissed

ITA 317/COCH/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin09 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148

same has already been added substantially in the case of one of the family member of director. Therefore the addition made resulted in double taxation and is bad in fact and should be deleted. 6. That the assessment order was passed against the principles of natural justice. The order

Hirachand Damji Dand, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle 16(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 1804/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan & Hirachand Damji Dand Vs. Acit Circle 16(1) A/704, Remi Biz Court, Plot No. 9, Aayakar Bhavan, Shah Industries Estate, Off Veera Mumbai-400 020 Desai Road, Azad Nagar, Andheri (West), Mumbai-400 053 Pan: Aaapd8985F (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 139(1)Section 154Section 90

declaring total income of Rs. 87,92,220/-. The ITA No. 1804 & 1803/Mum/2025 Hirachand Damji Dand assessee while filing his Return of Income, claimed double taxation tax relief in terms of section 90/90A of the Income Tax Act 1961. Inadvertently, the tax consultant who filed Return of Income ... file form no. 67 which is one of the essentials while claiming double taxation relief. Therefore, CPC, Bangalore while processing the Return of Income did not allow tax relief as form no. 67 was not filed. Upon realizing the error, the assessee filed Form 67 on 25/03/2021 and then filed

Hirachand Damji Dand, Mumbai vs. ACIT-Circle 16(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 1803/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan & Hirachand Damji Dand Vs. Acit Circle 16(1) A/704, Remi Biz Court, Plot No. 9, Aayakar Bhavan, Shah Industries Estate, Off Veera Mumbai-400 020 Desai Road, Azad Nagar, Andheri (West), Mumbai-400 053 Pan: Aaapd8985F (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 139(1)Section 154Section 90

declaring total income of Rs. 87,92,220/-. The ITA No. 1804 & 1803/Mum/2025 Hirachand Damji Dand assessee while filing his Return of Income, claimed double taxation tax relief in terms of section 90/90A of the Income Tax Act 1961. Inadvertently, the tax consultant who filed Return of Income ... file form no. 67 which is one of the essentials while claiming double taxation relief. Therefore, CPC, Bangalore while processing the Return of Income did not allow tax relief as form no. 67 was not filed. Upon realizing the error, the assessee filed Form 67 on 25/03/2021 and then filed

ACIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi vs. Bharti Airtel Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed and appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6079/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jun 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri Amitabh Shuklaआअसं.5692 और5693/दिल्ली/2019 (नि.व. 2007-08 और2008-09)

For Appellant: S/Shri Rohit Jain, Deepesh Jain, Advocates andFor Respondent: Shri Javed Akhtar, CIT(DR)
Section 195Section 40

made the payment of interest to ABN Amro Bank NV, Stockholm branch, and since, in terms of Article 11(3) of the India Sweden Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement ( 229 ITR Statute 11) any interest paid, on borrowings endorsed by EKN, to a Swedish resident is not taxable in India ... authorities to the effect that ABN Amro Bank NV Branch, Stockholm, is “a company resident in Sweden within meanings of the convention to avoid double taxation between Sweden and India” and that “the company is registered for taxes as a firm under number 516401-9761”. This plea was rejected

ACIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi vs. Bharti Airtel Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed and appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6078/DEL/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jun 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri Amitabh Shuklaआअसं.5692 और5693/दिल्ली/2019 (नि.व. 2007-08 और2008-09)

For Appellant: S/Shri Rohit Jain, Deepesh Jain, Advocates andFor Respondent: Shri Javed Akhtar, CIT(DR)
Section 195Section 40

made the payment of interest to ABN Amro Bank NV, Stockholm branch, and since, in terms of Article 11(3) of the India Sweden Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement ( 229 ITR Statute 11) any interest paid, on borrowings endorsed by EKN, to a Swedish resident is not taxable in India ... authorities to the effect that ABN Amro Bank NV Branch, Stockholm, is “ a company resident in Sweden within meanings of the convention to avoid double taxation between Sweden and India” and that “the company is registered for taxes as a firm under number 516401-9761”. This plea was rejected

Bharti Airtel Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle 4(2), New Delhi

The appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed and appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5963/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jun 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri Amitabh Shuklaआअसं.5692 और5693/िद"ी /2019(िन.व. 2007-08 और2008-09)

For Appellant: S/Shri Rohit Jain, Deepesh Jain, Advocates and Shri Shivam Gupta, Chartered AccoFor Respondent: Shri Javed Akhtar, CIT(DR)
Section 195Section 40

made the payment of interest to ABN Amro Bank NV, Stockholm branch, and since, in terms of Article 11(3) of the India Sweden Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement ( 229 ITR Statute 11) any interest paid, on borrowings endorsed by EKN, to a Swedish resident is not taxable in India ... authorities to the effect that ABN Amro Bank NV Branch, Stockholm, is “ a company resident in Sweden within meanings of the convention to avoid double taxation between Sweden and India” and that “the company is registered for taxes as a firm under number 516401-9761”. This plea was rejected

Bharti Airtel Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle 4(2), New Delhi

The appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed and appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5962/DEL/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jun 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri Amitabh Shuklaआअसं.5692 और5693/दिल्ली/2019 (नि.व. 2007-08 और2008-09)

For Appellant: S/Shri Rohit Jain, Deepesh Jain, Advocates andFor Respondent: Shri Javed Akhtar, CIT(DR)
Section 195Section 40

made the payment of interest to ABN Amro Bank NV, Stockholm branch, and since, in terms of Article 11(3) of the India Sweden Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement ( 229 ITR Statute 11) any interest paid, on borrowings endorsed by EKN, to a Swedish resident is not taxable in India ... authorities to the effect that ABN Amro Bank NV Branch, Stockholm, is “ a company resident in Sweden within meanings of the convention to avoid double taxation between Sweden and India” and that “the company is registered for taxes as a firm under number 516401-9761”. This plea was rejected

St. Joshephs Institute of Science and Technology Trust, Chennai vs. DCIT, Central Circle-193), Chennai

ITA 3296/CHNY/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.3293 & 3294/Chny/2024 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Year: 2018-19 & 2020-21 St. Joseph'S Educational Trust, 56-C, Old Mahabalipuram Road, Sholinganallur, Chennai-600 119. (Pan: Aamts 3888 G) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) V. The Dcit, Central Circle-1(3), Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.3295 To 3297/Chny/2024 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Year: 2018-19 To 2020-21 St. Joseph'S Institute Of Science & Technology Trust, 56-C, Old Mahabalipuram Road, Sholinganallur, Chennai-600 119. [Pan: Aahts 9943 B] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) V. The Dcit, Central Circle-1(3), Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr. V. Balaji, Ca & Mr. K.R. Vasudevan, Advocate By Virtual प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Ms. Anitha, Addl.Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04.04.2025 घोषणाकीतारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 06.06.2025 :: 2 ::

For Appellant: Mr. V. Balaji, CA &For Respondent: Ms. Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 270ASection 271A

amounting to Rs.1,02,75,000/- and (ii) addition of voluntary contribution amounting to :: 23 :: Rs.24 lakhs [which according to the assessee tantamounted to double taxation which was already included in the gross receipt shown by the assessee to the tune of Rs.49,40,58,348/-] and the AO assessed ... been filed on 12-04-2022 but the same has been ignored while passing the penalty order dated 30-03-2022. This amounts to double taxation of the same income. B) Furthermore, the Learned AO has made additions of INR 1,26,75,000/- without giving effect to the application

St. Josephs Institute of Science and Technology Trust, Chennai vs. Dcot. Central Circle-1(3), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 3295/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr. V. Balaji, CA &For Respondent: Ms. Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 270ASection 271A

Joseph’s Institute of Science & Technology Trust :: 24 :: Rs.24 lakhs [which according to the assessee tantamounted to double taxation which was already included in the gross receipt shown by the assessee to the tune of Rs.49,40,58,348/-] and the AO assessed the taxable income at Rs.74 ... been filed on 12-04-2022 but the same has been ignored while passing the penalty order dated 30-03-2022. This amounts to double taxation of the same income. B) Furthermore, the Learned AO has made additions of INR 1,26,75,000/- without giving effect to the application

St. Josephs Educational Trust, Chennai vs. DCIT, Central Circle-193), Chennai

ITA 3294/CHNY/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.3293 & 3294/Chny/2024 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Year: 2018-19 & 2020-21 St. Joseph'S Educational Trust, 56-C, Old Mahabalipuram Road, Sholinganallur, Chennai-600 119. [Pan: Aamts 3888 G] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) V. The Dcit, Central Circle-1(3), Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.3295 To 3297/Chny/2024 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Year: 2018-19 To 2020-21 St. Joseph'S Institute Of Science & Technology Trust, 56-C, Old Mahabalipuram Road, Sholinganallur, Chennai-600 119. [Pan: Aahts 9943 B] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) V. The Dcit, Central Circle-1(3), Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr. V. Balaji, Ca & Mr. K.R. Vasudevan, Advocate By Virtual प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Ms. Anitha, Addl.Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04.04.2025 घोषणाकीतारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 06.06.2025 :: 2 ::

For Appellant: Mr. V. Balaji, CA &For Respondent: Ms. Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 270ASection 271A

amounting to Rs.1,02,75,000/- and (ii) addition of voluntary contribution amounting to :: 24 :: Rs.24 lakhs [which according to the assessee tantamounted to double taxation which was already included in the gross receipt shown by the assessee to the tune of Rs.49,40,58,348/-] and the AO assessed ... been filed on 12-04-2022 but the same has been ignored while passing the penalty order dated 30-03-2022. This amounts to double taxation of the same income. B) Furthermore, the Learned AO has made additions of INR 1,26,75,000/- without giving effect to the application

St.Josephs Educational Trust, Chennai vs. DCIT, Central Circle-193), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 3293/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr. V. Balaji, CA &For Respondent: Ms. Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 270ASection 271A

Joseph’s Institute of Science & Technology Trust :: 24 :: Rs.24 lakhs [which according to the assessee tantamounted to double taxation which was already included in the gross receipt shown by the assessee to the tune of Rs.49,40,58,348/-] and the AO assessed the taxable income at Rs.74 ... been filed on 12-04-2022 but the same has been ignored while passing the penalty order dated 30-03-2022. This amounts to double taxation of the same income. B) Furthermore, the Learned AO has made additions of INR 1,26,75,000/- without giving effect to the application

Schindler India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income-Tax Officer, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is disposed off in light of aforesaid directions

ITA 4819/MUM/2024[AY 2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jun 2025

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailassessment Year : 2020-21 Schindler India Private Limited, The Asst. Commissioner Of Schindler House, Income Tax, Main Street, Vs. Circle-15(3)(2) Hiranandani Gardens, Aayakar Bhavan, Powai, Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai -400076 New Marine Lines, [Pan: Aaecs1548J] Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Chandani Shah a/wFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(8)Section 270ASection 274Section 37(1)Section 92C

duly filed a return of income in India offering such services to taxes, and that disallowing payments made by the Appellant would lead to double taxation. 2.4. The Ld. AO. L.d. TPO and Hon'ble DRP erred in upholding/ confirming the action of the learned AO/TPO whereby they have exceeded ... duly filed a return of income in India offering such services to taxes, and that disallowing payments made by the Appellant would lead to double taxation. 4.4. Ld. AO, Ld. TPO and Hon'ble DRP has erred Seeking documentation in relation with payment made by the AE to third party

Gemini Property Developments India LLP, Mumbai vs. Income-Tax Officer-Ward 28(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1435/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Girish Agrawal ()

Section 133(3)Section 263

loan is to be re-paid normally determines the rate of return on the money lent, i.e. the rate of interest. Klaus Vogel on Double Taxation Conventions (Third Edition) under Article 11 in paragraph 115 states as under:- "The existing differences in the levels of interest rates do not depend

Manasukh Velji Shah, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Central Circle -1, Thane

In the result, ground no.1 is allowed

ITA 4960/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri. Subodh Ratnaparkhi, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Addl. CIT
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

sources instead of business income, while directing for such a treatment, he did not grant consequential relief by reducing the business income, leading to double taxation of the same amount. In view of our observations and findings in the above paragraphs, while dealing with the common issue, interest income earned

Ramesh Velji Shah, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Central Circle -1, Thane

In the result, ground no.1 is allowed

ITA 4959/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri. Subodh Ratnaparkhi, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Addl. CIT
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

sources instead of business income, while directing for such a treatment, he did not grant consequential relief by reducing the business income, leading to double taxation of the same amount. In view of our observations and findings in the above paragraphs, while dealing with the common issue, interest income earned

Ethiopian Airlines Group, Ethiopia vs. ACIT, Int. Taxation Circle-1(2)(2), Delhi

ITA 2201/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

Section 115ASection 133ASection 147Section 195Section 9(1)Section 9(1)(vii)

India is no more a decisive factor. Our attention is further sought to be drawn to Article 12(3)(b) of India and Ethiopian Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement “DTAA” that there is no exception to the above statutory provisions therein nor does it contain any “make available” clause