Section 90 of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.159

Section 90 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 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 is Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence (P) Ltd. v. CIT (432 ITR 471), cited in 914 of the 1,075 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 90

Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence (P) Ltd. v. CIT
432 ITR 471 · 2021 · Supreme Court
914
citing judgments

Payments for the supply or use of computer software, where there is no transfer of copyright but only a right to use the copyrighted product, are generally considered business profits and not 'royalty' or 'fees for technical services' under the Income Tax Act, 1961 or relevant DTAAs. This principle also applies to transponder fees, which are not taxable as royalty.

Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan
263 ITR 706 · 2003 · Supreme Court
691
citing judgments

A citizen is free to carry on business within the law, and mere tax planning without a motive to evade taxes through colorable devices is not frowned upon. The liability to taxation, for the purpose of tax treaty application, is a legal situation, not the fiscal fact of actual payment.

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.

PCIT v. State Bank of Patiala
391 ITR 218 · 2017 · High Court
228
citing judgments

Income from shares and securities held by banks as stock-in-trade constitutes business income, hence Section 14A disallowance is not attracted. Further, any disallowance under Section 14A cannot exceed the actual amount of exempt income earned by the assessee during the year.

CIT v. Eli Lilly & Co.(India) Pvt. Ltd.
178 Taxmann 505 · 2009 · Supreme Court
172
citing judgments
Gramaphone Co. of India Ltd. v. Birendra Bahadur Pandey
132 Taxmann 373 · 2003 · Supreme Court
146
citing judgments
Techno Shares and Stocks Ltd. v. CIT
327 ITR 323 · 2010 · Supreme Court
130
citing judgments

Membership rights and business contracts, as 'business or commercial rights of similar nature' to a license or franchise, qualify as intangible assets eligible for depreciation under Section 32(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act.

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.

Wipro Ltd. v. DCIT
382 ITR 179 · 2016 · High Court
122
citing judgments

Foreign Tax Credit (FTC) is allowable even if no tax is paid in India on the corresponding income due to deductions under sections 10A or 10AA, or losses in other units. The scope of income eligible for deduction under Section 10AA includes interest on deposits and realized gains on forward contracts.

DCIT v. Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd.
149 Taxmann.com 332 · 2023 · ITAT
115
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 90

Senthil Kumar Thangavelu, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Circle-3(3)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 916/BANG/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Navneeth N. Kini, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(1)Section 90

Balasubramanian Saravanan, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-17(7), Chennai

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

ITA 1498/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Murali, CAFor Respondent: Shri AR. V. Sreenivasan, CIT
Section 119(2)(b)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 90

Kishorchandra Motilal Rajput, Bharuch vs. DCIT, Circle 2(1)(1), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 819/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra C. Mehta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kamal Deep Singh, Sr DR
Section 10Section 10ASection 139Section 142Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 89(1)

Harshvadan Natvarlal Chavda, Bharuch vs. DCIT, Circle 2(1)(1), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 794/AHD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Jul 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra C. Mehta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kamal Deep Singh, Sr DR
Section 10Section 10ASection 139Section 142Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250

Yogesh Hanumantrao Joshi, Pune vs. DCIT Circle - 12, Pune

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

ITA 956/PUN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Deepak Kumar Kedia
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 6Section 90

Sumukh Suresh Bhardwaj, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(2)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 935/BANG/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Veerabasanagouda, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Ghale, Advocate for Standing
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 90

Shri Ramasamy Jayakumar, Kanchipuram vs. DCIT, Non Corp. Circle-17(1), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 852/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.S.P. ChidambaramFor Respondent: Mr.Gautham S. Mukundan
Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 90

Sivakarthick Raman, Madurai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle Madurai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 281/CHNY/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jul 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:281/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2022-23 Sivakarthick Raman, The Assistant Commissioner Of 5/200, 2Nd Street, Alagupillai Nagar, Vs. Income Tax, T.Pudukudi, International Taxation Circle, Achampathu, Madurai. Madurai – 625 019. [Pan: Ajnpr-3214-R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/Appellant By : Ms. Preeti Goel, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Anitha, Addl. C.I.T. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21.04.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 07.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am:

For Appellant: Ms. Preeti Goel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Anitha, Addl. C.I.T
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 15Section 15(1)(a)Section 234BSection 234DSection 5(2)Section 5(2)(a)Section 9(1)(ii)Section 90

Ttec India Customer Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Pr.CIT-3, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1026/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2020-21 Ttec India Customer Solutions Pr.Commissioner Of Private Limited, Ttec Ahmedabad Vs. Income Tax-3 Opp: L.J.College Vejalpur Off: Sg Road, Makarba Ahmedabad. Fatewadi Bo, Fatewadi Ahmedabad. Pan : Aaccm 1005A (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Vishal Kabra, Ar Assessee By : Shri Rignesh Das, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03/07/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 04/07/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 37(1)Section 80G

Manoj Madhukar Gajarlawar, Kanchipuram vs. ACIT, Ncc-22(1), Tambaram

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1030/CHNY/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr.Girish Sonthlia, AdvocateFor Respondent: DR is on leave
Section 119(2)(b)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 90

Yuraaz Arora, Mumbai vs. Ward 34(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, grounds of appeal raised by assessee are allowed

ITA 4904/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member)

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 154Section 254(1)Section 90

Praveen Saxena, Lucknow vs. ITO-6(1), Lucknow-New

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 202/LKW/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow03 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2020-21 Praveen Saxena V. Income Tax Officer 6(1) Flat No.G-01, Tower-J Lucknow - New Shalimar Gallant Vigyanpuri, Mahanagar Lucknow Tan/Pan:Ajpps5818N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Samrat Chandra, C.A. Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R. O R D E R This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 07.02.2024, Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For Assessment Year 2020-21. 2.0 The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration On 09.01.2021, Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.22,57,120/- & Also Claimed Relief Under Section 90 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act’) For A Sum Of Rs.3,48,632/- Being Foreign Tax Credit. The Centralized Processing Centre (Cpc) Processed The Return Under Section 143(1) Of The Act & Rejected The Relief Of Rs.3,48,632/- Claimed By The Assessee Under Section 90 Of The

For Appellant: Shri Samrat Chandra, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 90

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

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

ITA 111/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

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

Nagarajan Shapoorna, Madurai vs. ITO, Ncw-1(7), Madurai

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

ITA 812/CHNY/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.812/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22 Nagarajan Shapoorna, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 2A, Vp Rathinasamy Nadar Road, Non Corporate Ward 1(7), Visalakshipuram, Madurai 625 014. Madurai. [Pan:Djwps7535G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Thulasiram, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 04.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.06.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 27.01.2025 Passed By The Addl/Jcit(A)-1, Gurugram For The Assessment Year 2021-22. 2. The Assessee Raised 7 Grounds Of Appeal Amongst Which, The Only Issue Emanates For Our Consideration As To Whether The Ld. Cit(A) Is Justified In Confirming The Disallowance Made By The Assessing Officer Towards Foreign Tax Credit Claimed At ₹.1,82,847/- Under Section 90/90A Of 2

For Appellant: Shri R. Thulasiram, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 90

Sankaran, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-17(7), Chennai

ITA 1212/CHNY/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Jun 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1212/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2023-24 Sankaran, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 73/28, Balakrishnan Street Extension, Non Corporate Ward 17(7), West Mambalam, Chennai 600 033. Chennai. [Pan:Bpbps4698F] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से / Appellant By Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By Shri Vijay Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing 18.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 30.06.2025 आदेश /Order Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 14.02.2025 Passed By The Addl./Jcit(A)-5, Mumbai For The

Section 143(1)Section 90

Income Tax Officer, C.R. Building vs. Fashion Factory (International) Pvt. Ltd, Delhi

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

ITA 4974/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sureder Kumar Jatav, Sr DR
Section 143(1)Section 295Section 90

Ojas Shashikant Kulkarni, Margao vs. Asst. Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

ITA 50/PAN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji20 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavankumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 050/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2020-21 Ojas Shashikant Kulkarni A-3/A-4, C.D. Neighbourhood, Swami Chinmayanand Marg, Gogoi, Salcete, Margao, Goa Pan : Dkzpk5732F . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Asstt. Director Income Tax, Cpc, Bengaluru. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Mr D.E. Robinson [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Smt Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 19/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 20/06/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; Assessee’S Captioned Appeal Impugns Din & Order 1072026383(1) Dt. 09/01/2025 Passed By Addl//Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax Appeals-2, Jaipur [‘Ld. Cit(A)’] U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’] Which In Turn Arisen Out Of Order Of Intimation Dt. 26/11/2021 Passed U/S 143(1) Of The Act By Asstt. Direction Of Income Tax, Cpc, Bengaluru [‘Ld. Ao’] Anent To Assessment Year 2020-21 [‘Ay’].

For Appellant: Mr D.E. Robinson [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Smt Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 246ASection 249Section 250Section 90

ACIT Circle-64(1), New Delhi vs. Ashima Neb, Noida

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed being devoid of any merit

ITA 4206/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jun 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanआअसं.3953 और 4206 /िद"ी/2019(िन.व. 2008-09)

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Tripathi, Sr. DRFor Respondent: S/Shri Gautam Jain, Parth Singhal & Ankit Kumar, Advocates
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 4

ACIT Circle-64(1), New Delhi vs. Ashima Neb, Noida

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed being devoid of any merit

ITA 3953/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jun 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanआअसं.3953 और 4206 /िद"ी/2019(िन.व. 2008-09)

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Tripathi, Sr. DRFor Respondent: S/Shri Gautam Jain, Parth Singhal & Ankit Kumar, Advocates
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 4

F.C.C. Co. Ltd., Gurgaon, Haryana vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (International Tax)-1(3)(1), New Delhi, Civic Center

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of the discussion made herein above

ITITA 583/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalit (It)A No.583/Del/2025 (Assessment Year:2022-23) F.C.C. Co. Ltd., Asst. Cit, Plot No.5, Sector-3, (International Taxation), Imt Manesar, Gurgaon, Vs. Circle-1(3)(1), Haryana-122001 New Delhi. Pan:Aabcf5381M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri K.M. Gupta, Adv., Ms. Shruti Khimta, Adv. & Sh. Harmeet Singh, Ca Department By Dr. Saurabh Anand, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 07.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 18.06.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Final Assessment Order Passed By The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle Int. Tax- 1(3)(1) U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act” In Short) Dated 11.12.2024 For A.Y. 2022-23. 2. The Assessee Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Final Assessment Order Passed By The Learned Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax, International Taxation 1(3)(1), New Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As 'Ld. Ao') Pursuant To The Directions Of The Dispute Resolution Panel-I ('Drp') Dated 11 December 2024, Under Section 143(3) Read With Section 144C(13) Is Bad In Law & Barred By Limitation. 2. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Ao/ Drp Has Erred In Assessing The Income Of The Applicant To Inr 92,88,38,447 As Against The Returned Income Of Inr 88,48,88,793 Thereby Making An Addition Of Inr 4,39,49,654. 3. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Ao/ Drp Has Erred In Alleging The Existence Of A Permanent Establishment ('Pe') In The Nature Of A Fixed Place Pe & Supervisory

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 234BSection 270ASection 9(1)(i)Section 90