Latest Income-Tax Details

For Full Access To All Latest Judgments on Income Tax
Click Here To Subscribe Now
Take a tour of our Income-Tax Library

Assessee has raised the ground that the Hon’ble CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the AO by holding the appellant was not entitled to the beneficial provisions of Art. 9 (Shipping) of the DTAA between India and the United Kingdom (India UK DTAA) since the appellant did not own or hire any ships and the income was not derived from the use or hire of the containers in international traffic.

Shanti Prime Publication Pvt. Ltd.

Rule 10 of Income Tax Rules, 1962 - Double taxation relief – The assessee challenged the order of CIT(A) on the grounds that “ The CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the AO by holding the appellant was not entitled to the beneficial provisions of Art. 9 (Shipping) of the DTAA between India and the United Kingdom (India UK DTAA) since the appellant did not own or hire any ships and the income was not derived from the use or hire of the containers in international traffic and; CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the AO in holding that the agent in India was a ‘Dependent Agent’ of the appellant, constituting a permanent establishment (PE) within the meaning of Art. 5 of India UK DTS, and the appellant was, therefore, liable to be taxed under Art. 7 of India UK DTAA. ITAT allowed appeal of the assessee and held that:- Once an agent has been paid arm’s length remuneration, and the income embedded in such remuneration has been taxed in India, no further profits can be taxed in the hands of the DAPE. Accordingly, deleted the impugned addition of Rs 54,84,213.—OT AFRICA LINE LTD. vs. DEPUTY DIT.