Beneficial ownership test for treaty interest relief was remanded after incomplete examination of financial records.

Treaty relief under Article 11 of the India-Cyprus DTAA depended on whether the assessee was the beneficial owner of the interest income. The adverse view was based mainly on a nil disclosure in the return and a conduit allegation, but the financial statements and supporting records showing subsidiaries, CCD holdings, borrowings and related balance-sheet details were not examined. Because the factual foundation was incomplete and the beneficial ownership test had not been properly applied, the adverse finding was set aside and the matter restored for fresh adjudication.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee was entitled to the concessional rate under Article 11 of the India-Cyprus Double Tax Avoidance Agreement on interest income as the beneficial owner of the interest.

Analysis: The issue turned on whether the assessee satisfied the beneficial ownership requirement for the treaty rate of 10% on interest. The lower authorities had denied the benefit mainly on the basis of the assets-and-liabilities position reported in the return, treating the assessee as a conduit, but the financial statements and supporting records showed investments in subsidiaries, holdings in CCDs, borrowings, and other balance-sheet details that were not examined. Since the mistaken nil disclosure in the return was relied upon without considering the financial statements and relevant documents, the factual foundation for the adverse finding was incomplete. The matter also required application of the relevant tests for beneficial ownership.

Conclusion: The adverse finding on beneficial ownership was set aside and the issue was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication; the ground was allowed for statistical purposes.

---