← 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

Techno Tteaching Infosolution Pvt. Ltd, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 1(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 54/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 143(2)Section 68

laid down by ICAI and according to him assessing the same by the AO by all the three subsequent assessment year would lead to double taxation. The main contention of the Ld. A.R is that the AO has made error by addition Rs. 4,11,99,736/- by deferring

Il&Fs Rail Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Gurgaon

In the result, appeals of the assesses are allowed, pro tanto

ITA 1288/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआअसं.994/िद"ी/2025(िन.व. 2022-23) Kosi Aviation Leasing Ltd., C/O Dmd Advocates, 30, Nizamuddin East, New Delhi 110013 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan : Aaick-6199-B बनाम Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle 2(1)(2), Civic Centre, ....."ितवादी/Respondent Minto Road, New Delhi 110002 आअसं.1027/िद"ी/2025(िन.व. 2022-23) Hoohly Aviation Leasing Ltd., C/O Dmd Advocates, 30, Nizamuddin East, New Delhi 110013 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan : Aafch-6609-C बनाम Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle 2(1)(1), Civic Centre, ....."ितवादी/Respondent Minto Road, New Delhi 110002 आअसं.1070/िद"ी/2025(िन.व. 2022-23) Luni Aviation Leasing Ltd., C/O Dmd Advocates, 30, Nizamuddin East, New Delhi 110013 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan : Aaecl-5180-H बनाम Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle 2(2)(1), Civic Centre, ....."ितवादी/Respondent Minto Road, New Delhi 110002

with the Lessees for leasing of aircrafts - Whether Operating lease or Financial lease?; (ii) Applicability of Multilateral Instruments (MLI) vis a vis India-Ireland Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA); 30 ITA No.994/Del/2025 (A.Y.2022-23)& Other Group Appeals (iii) Whether the assesses/appellants are eligible for benefit of Article 8 of India-Ireland ... April 2021 which introduces a substantive limitation by inserting the following words into Section 90(1)(b) of the Act: "...for the avoidance of double taxation of income under this Act and under the corresponding law in force in that country or specified territory, as the case may be, [without

Swaminathan Vijayan, Palakkad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward2, Palakkad

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

ITA 75/COCH/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Mar 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Sri.B.Mohan, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Leena Lal, Sr.AR

submitted that the assessment made on the assessee as well as the on the partnership firm for the same very same income amounts to double taxation, which is not envisaged under the Income-tax Act. The assessee also submitted the required documents including bank account details and the other records ... income could not be assessed in the hands of the assessee as well as in the hands of the firm, otherwise it would be double taxation which is not permitted under the provisions of the Act. The ld.CIT(A) had observed in his order that, which is extracted above

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Jhunjhunu vs. Sunita Dada, Pilani, Jhunjhunu

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1374/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Gagan Goyal & Shri Narinder Kumar

For Appellant: Mr. Saurav Harsh, Adv. Ld. ARFor Respondent: Mr. Gautam Singh Choudhary
Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69

otherwise is under question, or ii. Appeals of International taxation charges where the dispute relates to the applicability of the provisions of a Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement or otherwise m. Any other case or class of cases where in the opinion of the Board it is necessary to contest

Sant Kumar Suri, Nurpur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 336/CHANDI/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh13 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 44A

balance sheet. Increase in one figure will lead to increase in the other. Making addition for both capital and stock will lead to double taxation. It is on this score also that the subject issues deserves to be dropped. 9.4 Ld. Counsel for the Assessee also submitted his legal arguments

Hanning Motors India Private Limited, Vadodara vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara

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

ITA 1931/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Mar 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Revenue by
Section 143(3)Section 92C

assets is considered while computing the operating profit margins; c. Not appreciating that separate benchmarking of Capital Assets from AE's has lead to double taxation as depreciation on such assets has already been considered for the purpose of computing operating margins; d. Considering the ALP of the Fixed Assets

ITO Ward 39 (2) vs. Kimti Lal Jain

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

ITA 4091/DEL/2006[1998-1999]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Mar 2025AY 1998-1999

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Dcit, Vs. Consulting Engineering Circle-4(2), Services (India) Pvt. Ltd, 2Nd Floor, Plot No. 184, Platinum New Delhi Tower, Udyog Vihar, Phase-1, Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaacc5110G Assessee By : Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Adv Shri Tarun Chanana, Adv Shri Shivam Yadav, Adv Revenue By: Shri Sanjay Kumar Bharati, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 16/01/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 21/03/2025

For Appellant: Ms. Ananya Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar Bharati, CIT DR
Section 127Section 142Section 143(3)Section 250

being interest recoverable from Cee-Ess Development Consultants (P) Ltd. for tax in AY 2010-11 and such confirmation of addition has resulted in double taxation of the said sum. Therefore, it is not justified on the part of Ld. CIT(A) to confirm the aforesaid addition. GROUND ... That the Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the confirmation of addition of Rs. 2,86,86,731/- has resulted in double taxation. Therefore, it is not justified on the part of the Ld. CIT(A) to confirm the aforesaid addition. GROUND 5 5.1 That

Balaji Udyog, Jalgaon vs. ITO Ward 1(3), Jalgaon

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

ITA 1501/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1501/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Balaji Udyog, Vs. Ito, Ward-1(3), Jalgaon. J-81, Midc Area, Jalgaon- 425003. Pan : Aagfb2522E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Vinay Kawadia Revenue By : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 23.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.03.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 22.05.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1) Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Learned Cit(A). Nfac Has Erred In Confirming The Disallowance Of Interest Paid To Partners Amounting To Rs.19,23,457/- U/S 40(B) Of The Act. He Specifically Erred In Law In Recasting The Capital Accounts Of The Partners On Account Of Non-Provision Of Depreciation In Books Of Account. 2) The Ld. Cit(A) Erred On Facts & In Law In Upholding Disallowance Of Rs.1,13,286/-Being 10% Of The Various Expenses Debited To Profit & Loss Account.

For Appellant: Shri Vinay KawadiaFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 274Section 32(1)Section 40

submitted by Ld. AR that the partners have already shown this interest income in their respective returns of income and therefore this will be double taxation if the same interest is disallowed and added back to the income of the assessee firm. 5 7. With regard to disallowance of interest

Raziulla Syed, Hyderabad vs. ITO (Int Taxn)-2, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 986/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: CA P Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 195

assessee has already paid the tax on income earned in Qatar and taxing the same income again in India would lead to double taxation which is injustice to the assessee and bad in law. In support of this contention, the Learned Counsel for the Assessee relied upon the decision

Selvan Nirmala, Salem vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Hosur

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

ITA 3109/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K, Hon’Ble & Shri S.R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 3109/Chny/2024 ननिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Selvan Nirmala, Acit Shop No.6, Dddc Building, V. Circle -1, Sub-Jail Road, Maruthi Nagar, Krishnagiri- 636 007. Hosur – 635 109. [Pan: Aeapn-6574-Q] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से/Appellant By : Mr. S. Bhupendran, Advocate प्रत्यथी की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24.02.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11.03.2025

For Appellant: Mr. S. Bhupendran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 44A

opinion that when the sale has been reflected in the books of accounts and offered to tax, adding the same again would amount to double taxation, which is impermissible in law. The cash sales made by the assessee have been credited in the books of accounts and the same form ... opinion that when the sale has been reflected in the books of accounts and offered to tax, adding the same again would amount to double taxation which is impermissible in law. The cash sales proceeds have been credited in the books of accounts and the same form part of assessee

Sh. Tarachand Gupta, Alwar vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Alwar

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue in ITA no

ITA 448/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Mar 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

were treated as application of the income. This claim of set off is acceptable as taxing income as well as investment will result in double taxation. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of Rajasthan High Court in case of CIT Vs. Tyaryamal Bal Chand 165 ITR 0453 and Supreme ... there is surplus of Rs.50,28,318. As the incomes have been taxed, the application need not be taxed separately to avoid double taxation. In the result, this ground of appeal is partly allowed. Ground No. 6 9.2 I have considered the facts of the case and written submissions

Sh. Tarachand Gupta, Alwar vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Alwar

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue in ITA no

ITA 447/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Mar 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

deleted the addition on the ground that unaccounted receipt has been taxed earlier. Even otherwise also, both income & investment cannot be taxed to avoid double taxation. Based on these set of fact we do not find any infirmity in the order of the Id. CIT(A) while dealing with that

Piyush Jain, Indore vs. Income Tax Officer-4(4), Indore, ITO

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

ITA 368/IND/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore07 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Gagan Tiwari & Ms. Priyal Jain, ARsFor Respondent: Sh. Ashish Porwal, Sr. D. R
Section 143(3)Section 199CSection 250Section 68

Officer to be the income of the assessee, addition of the same amount once again under section 68 of the Act would tantamount to double taxation of the same income. 20. ITAT, Jaipur Bench, in Chandra Surana, ITA No. 166/JP/2022 [CLC Page 94- 105] held that"... It is also observed

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Jewel World, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 63/AHD/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Mar 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.63/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Assistant Commissioner Of Jewel World बनाम/ Income-Tax 5, Balaji Heights V/S. Circle-2(1)(1) Swagat Cross Road Ahmedabad – 380 015 Nr. Lal Bungalows Cg Road, Ahmedabad-380 009 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan:Aajfj 5833 H अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri M.K. Patel, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Kavan Limbasiya, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05 /03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 07 /03/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Cit(A)”], Dated 06.12.2023, For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18, Whereby The Cit(A) Deleted The Addition Of Rs.5,61,85,000/- Made By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 69A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”]. Asst.Cit Vs. Jewel World Asst. Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kavan Limbasiya, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 271ASection 69A

rulings reaffirmed that cash sales cannot be disbelieved without proper evidence. 4.3. The CIT(A) observed that the AO’s approach effectively resulted in double taxation, as the sales were already offered to tax in the Profit & Loss Account. Taxing the same amount again under Section ... decision of Indore Bench in the case of Dewas Soya Ltd. v. ITO (ITA No.336/Ind/2012), where it was held that an addition leading to double taxation must be deleted. Asst.CIT vs. Jewel World Asst. Year : 2017-18 5. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the Revenue preferred an appeal

DCIT, Circle-8, Pune vs. Posco India Pune Processing Center Pvt. Ltd., Pune

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue as well as the Cross Objections of the assessee for A

ITA 1002/PUN/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1001 & 1002/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri V. Krishna V. GujarathiFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

Rs.10,43,63,947/- which will be much more than the actual loss booked and claimed by the company and will result in double taxation of the same amount. However, the AO was not satisfied with the submissions made by the assessee company and made addition of said ... loss in three years but for the AY under consideration the department has reversed the losses booked earlier and thus has resulted in double taxation of the same amount which was already disallowed by company in computing taxable income. The appellant has also stated the following in support

DCIT, Circle-8, Pune vs. Posco India Pune Processing Center Pvt. Ltd., Pune

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue as well as the Cross Objections of the assessee for A

ITA 1001/PUN/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Mar 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1001 & 1002/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri V. Krishna V. GujarathiFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

Rs.10,43,63,947/- which will be much more than the actual loss booked and claimed by the company and will result in double taxation of the same amount. However, the AO was not satisfied with the submissions made by the assessee company and made addition of said ... loss in three years but for the AY under consideration the department has reversed the losses booked earlier and thus has resulted in double taxation of the same amount which was already disallowed by company in computing taxable income. The appellant has also stated the following in support

Harsco India Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle 2(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 1041/HYD/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1041/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22) Harsco India (P) Ltd Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Hyderabad Income Tax, Circle 2(1) Pan:Aacch0555L Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Ca Suvibha Nolka राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri B Bala Krishna, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 08/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 06/03/2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: CA Suvibha NolkaFor Respondent: : Shri B Bala Krishna, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

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

Madan Kumar Sivinigari, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(3)(5), Bangalore

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

ITA 2606/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Mar 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Navneet N Kini, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Gale, Standing Counsel for Dept
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 90

construed as procedural rather than substantive. The intent of the legislature, as reflected in section 90 of the Act, is to provide relief from double taxation. The denial of Foreign Tax Credit solely on account of a procedural lapse would defeat this very purpose. Further the provisions of DTAA override ... 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

Income Tax Officer, Vijayapur vs. Vikram Dalichand Bandari, Vijayapur

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1390/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessmentyear:2014-15

For Appellant: Sri Sudheendra B.R., A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

cash. The ld. CIT(A) was also of the view that addition of cash deposit u/s 69A of the Act would result in double taxation of the same amount once in the form of business income and again at the rate of 60% u/s 115BBE ... return of income filed in response to notice u/s 148; (iii) addition of entire cash deposit u/s 69A of the Act would result in double taxation of the same amount once in the form of business income and again at the rate of 60% u/s 115BBE; (iv) On perusing

ACIT Circle 1 (1)&Tps, Mangaluru vs. M/S the South Canara District Central Co-Operative Bank Limited., Mangaluru

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 2333/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar – AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Nandini Das, CIT (DR)
Section 145Section 22(1)

then setoff to the extent of amount offered on cash basis in current year shall allowed to the assessee otherwise same will amount to double taxation. 18.1.4. Before parting, it is imperative to note that under the concept of accrual system of accounting viz a viz cash system of accounting ... assessee cannot be applied for the year under consideration. 18.2.5. Before parting, it is equally important to note that there should not be any double taxation to the income of the assessee merely because of change in the method of accounting from cash to accrual for the investment which