← 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

DCIT, CC-1, Ludhiana vs. M/S Gurdev Wool & Fibers, Ludhiana

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 956/CHANDI/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 956/Chd/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 The Dcit, M/S Gurdev Wool & Fibers, बनाम Central Circle-1, 6515/14, Haibowal, Ludhiana Jassian Road, Vs. Ludhiana "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aalfg2972Q अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : None राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Rohit Sharma, Cit Dr (Virtual) सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 06.02.2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24.02.2025 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, Am : Appeal In This Case Has Been Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 24.04.2018 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Jalandhar [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’], For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR
Section 127Section 132Section 153C

Gurdev Wool & Fibers, Ludhiana 11 protective basis in the hands of M/s Punjab Wool Traders, Ludhiana as it would tantamount to double taxation of the same amount. Here it would not be out of place to mention that all the bogus transactions were made by the main concern

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(2), Chennai vs. Ms Va Tech Wabag Limited, Chennai

ITA 2256/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon'Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon'Ble Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.2246, 2247 & 2248/Chny/2024 (निर्धारणवर्ष / Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-2021) M/S. Va Tech Wabag Ltd, 'Wabag House” No.17, 200 Feet Redial Road, S. Kolathur (Near Kamakshi Hospital) Chennai 600 117 Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle 3(2) Chennai. [Pan: Aabcv 0225G] आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.2256, 2257 & 2258/Chny/2024 (निर्धारणवर्ष / Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-2021) The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs M/S. Va Tech Wabag Ltd, Income Tax, 'Wabag House” Central Circle 3(2) No.17, 200 Feet Redial Road, Chennai. S. Kolathur (Near Kamakshi Hospital) Chennai 600 117 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Assessee By Department By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate : Shri. P. Vijaideepan, Irs, Jcit. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13.02.2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 24.02.2025 2

For Respondent: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण 'ए” न्यायपीठ चेन्नई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'A' BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय श्री मनु कुमार

Dy. CIT, Corporate Circle-1, Coimbatore vs. M/S Rkr Gold Pvt Ltd., Coimbatore

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 10/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 10/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. Rkr Gold Pvt Ltd., Deputy Commissioner Of V. No. 169, T.V. Samy Road West, Income Tax, R.S. Puram, Coimbatore South, Corporate Circle-1, Aayakar Coimbatore – 641 002. Bhavan, [Pan: Aadcr-4414-M] 63, Race Course Road, Coimbatore – 641 018. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri.R.Clement Ramesh, Cit अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri.N.Arjun Raj, Advocate & Shri Girish Kumar, Advocate सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19.02.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24.02.2025 आदेश /O R D E R

For Respondent: Shri.N.Arjun Raj, Advocate &
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 69A

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 ... 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

Jasmin Co-Operative Credit Society Limited, Kalyan vs. ITO Ward 3(1) Kalyan, Kalyan

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

ITA 6826/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Feb 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Shri. Omkareshwar Chidara, Am & And Jasmin Co-Operative Credit Society Ito Ward 3(1) Limited Rani Mansion, Kalyan – 421301. Vs. 6, Joker Plaza, Bail Bazar, Kalyan (West), Thane – 421301. Pan/Gir No. (Assessee) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. Sushant N. Alme Respondent By : Shri. Anil Gupta, Sr. Dr. Date Of Hearing : 24.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.02.2025 O R D E R Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M: These Captioned Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee, Challenging The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (‘Ld. Cit(A)’ For Short), National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Nfac’ For Short) Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act'), Pertaining To The Assessment Year (‘A.Y.’ For Short) 2015-16, 2019-20 & 2020-21. 2. As The Facts Are Identical In All These Appeals, We Hereby Pass A Consolidated Order To Taking Ita No. 6825/Mum/2024 As A Lead Case.

For Appellant: Shri. Sushant N. AlmeFor Respondent: Shri. Anil Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 56Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

however while calculating tax in the Computation Sheet he has wrongly taken taxable income at Rs. 37,28,636/- and therefore there is double taxation on the same income.”. 4. Briefly stated, the assessee is a Co-operative Credit Society registered under Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, engaged

Jasmin Co Operative Credit Society Ltd, Kalyan vs. ITO Ward 3(1), Kalyan

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

ITA 6825/MUM/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Feb 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Shri. Omkareshwar Chidara, Am & And Jasmin Co-Operative Credit Society Ito Ward 3(1) Limited Rani Mansion, Kalyan – 421301. Vs. 6, Joker Plaza, Bail Bazar, Kalyan (West), Thane – 421301. Pan/Gir No. (Assessee) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. Sushant N. Alme Respondent By : Shri. Anil Gupta, Sr. Dr. Date Of Hearing : 24.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.02.2025 O R D E R Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M: These Captioned Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee, Challenging The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (‘Ld. Cit(A)’ For Short), National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Nfac’ For Short) Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act'), Pertaining To The Assessment Year (‘A.Y.’ For Short) 2015-16, 2019-20 & 2020-21. 2. As The Facts Are Identical In All These Appeals, We Hereby Pass A Consolidated Order To Taking Ita No. 6825/Mum/2024 As A Lead Case.

For Appellant: Shri. Sushant N. AlmeFor Respondent: Shri. Anil Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 56Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

however while calculating tax in the Computation Sheet he has wrongly taken taxable income at Rs. 37,28,636/- and therefore there is double taxation on the same income.”. 4. Briefly stated, the assessee is a Co-operative Credit Society registered under Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, engaged

Jasmin Co Op Credit Society, Kalyan Thane vs. ITO Ward 3(1) Kalyan, Kalyan

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

ITA 6824/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Feb 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Shri. Omkareshwar Chidara, Am & And Jasmin Co-Operative Credit Society Ito Ward 3(1) Limited Rani Mansion, Kalyan – 421301. Vs. 6, Joker Plaza, Bail Bazar, Kalyan (West), Thane – 421301. Pan/Gir No. (Assessee) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. Sushant N. Alme Respondent By : Shri. Anil Gupta, Sr. Dr. Date Of Hearing : 24.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.02.2025 O R D E R Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M: These Captioned Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee, Challenging The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (‘Ld. Cit(A)’ For Short), National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Nfac’ For Short) Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act'), Pertaining To The Assessment Year (‘A.Y.’ For Short) 2015-16, 2019-20 & 2020-21. 2. As The Facts Are Identical In All These Appeals, We Hereby Pass A Consolidated Order To Taking Ita No. 6825/Mum/2024 As A Lead Case.

For Appellant: Shri. Sushant N. AlmeFor Respondent: Shri. Anil Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 56Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

however while calculating tax in the Computation Sheet he has wrongly taken taxable income at Rs. 37,28,636/- and therefore there is double taxation on the same income.”. 4. Briefly stated, the assessee is a Co-operative Credit Society registered under Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, engaged

Mrs. Babu Sheeny, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-6(1), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3206/CHNY/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Feb 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri George George K, Hon’Ble & Shri S.R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 3206/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22 Mrs. Babu Sheeny, The Income Tax Officer, New No. 719, Old No. 666, V. Non Corporate Ward -6(1), T.H. Road, Thiruvottiyur, Chennai – 600 034. Chennai – 600 019. [Pan: Aawps-4485-R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Mr. K. Ravi, Ca अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gauthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19.02.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 21.02.2025

For Respondent: Ms. Gauthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 143(1)(a)Section 154

been offered under the head income from house property and income from other sources already :-3-: ITA. No: 3206/Chny/2024 and hence, disallowance amounts to double taxation of the same. Apart from that, the assessee also filed a grievance on 23.07.2022 in the income tax website. Since, the CPC, Bangalore ... income tax returns filed by the assessee, the adjustment made by the CPC, Bangalore and confirmed by the ld. Addl/JCIT(A) amounts to double taxation of the same and hence, prayed for :-5-: ITA. No: 3206/Chny/2024 deleting the same by setting aside the order of the ld. Addl/JCIT