Section 90(2) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.159

Section 90(2) falls under section 90 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 159 (Agreement with foreign countries or specified territories and adoption by Central Government of Agreement between Specified associations for double taxation relief) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 159 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 90(2) is CIT v. De Beers India Minerals (P.) Ltd. (346 ITR 467), cited in 371 of the 387 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 90(2)

CIT v. De Beers India Minerals (P.) Ltd.
346 ITR 467 · 2012 · High Court
371
citing judgments

For fees for technical or consultancy services to 'make available' technical knowledge or know-how under a DTAA, the service must transmit such knowledge, allowing the recipient to derive an enduring benefit and utilize it independently in the future.

Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co. Ltd. v. DIT
332 ITR 340 · 2011 · High Court
359
citing judgments

Payments for the use of equipment, such as satellite transponders, do not constitute 'royalty' under Section 9(1)(vi) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, or under applicable tax treaties, especially when there is no transfer of the right to use a process or underlying technology.

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.

Skycell Communications Ltd. v. DCIT
251 ITR 53 · 2001 · High Court
253
citing judgments

Technical services involve human intervention and expertise, not just routine or machine-based operations. Routine customer support and standard facility provision through technology do not constitute technical services under the Act.

Shivsagar Veg Restaurant v. ACIT
317 ITR 433 · 2009 · High Court
202
citing judgments

Orders that are inordinately delayed are liable to be recalled and heard afresh, and the Appellate Tribunal President should frame guidelines for timely disposal of appeals.

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.

CIT v. IBM India Ltd.
357 ITR 88 · 2013 · High Court
88
citing judgments

Expenditure on application software, which enhances business efficiency and requires a computer system to function, constitutes revenue expenditure rather than acquisition of a capital asset, even if it provides an enduring benefit.

CIT v. Hariprasad & Company Pvt. Ltd.
99 ITR 118 · 1975 · Supreme Court
78
citing judgments

The terms 'income' or 'profits and gains' are inclusive of losses, signifying that losses are 'minus income' to be factored into the computation of taxable income. Therefore, set-off and carry forward provisions for losses apply exclusively to taxable income or gains and cannot be pressed into service against non-taxable gains, such as those exempt under a DTAA or other specific provisions.

CIT (Intl.Taxn) v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.
203 Taxmann 477 · 2011 · High Court
65
citing judgments
Trib.) Giesecke & Devrient 16.994%). India Pvt Ltd. v. ACIT
120 Taxmann.com 338 · 2020 · High Court
52
citing judgments

The provisions of a Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) would prevail over the domestic law rate of Dividend Distribution Tax (DDT) under Section 115-O.

Judgments on Section 90(2)

Avo Carbon Holding Llc, Chennai vs. DCIT International Taxation 1, Chennai

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

ITA 2700/CHNY/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Sept 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.2700/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2014-15 M/S. Avo Carbon Holding Llc, The Deputy Commissioner Of 25/A2, Dairy Plant Road, Sidco Vs. Income Tax, International Taxation -1, Industrial Estate Ambattur, Aayakar Bhavan, 121, Chennai 600 098. Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai 600 034. [Pan: Aajca5998D] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri B. Ramana Kumar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Srinivasa Rao, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 19.06.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18.09.2018 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 16, Chennai Dated 01.08.2017 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2014-15. The Ground Raised By The Assessee Is That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Assessment Of Treating The Management Fee Of ₹.1,65,77,213/- As “Fee For Included Services”. Alternatively, The Assessee Has Pleaded That The Said Payment Do Not Fall Within The Definition Of Fis & By Virtue Of Section 90(2) Of The Act, The Same Was Not Taxable In India.

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramana Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Srinivasa Rao, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 90(2)