Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the Tribunal's earlier order contained a mistake apparent from the record in holding that Article 7 of the India-Mauritius DTAA was inapplicable and in declining to examine the assessee's liability under that article, warranting rectification and recall of the order for limited reconsideration.
Analysis: The authorities below had proceeded on the footing that Article 7 applied, and the controversy before the Tribunal was not whether Article 7 was attracted at all but whether, on that footing, the assessee had a permanent establishment in India and whether the income could be assessed on gross basis under Section 44B. The earlier order had gone behind an uncontested finding and treated the discussion of Articles 4, 5 and 7 as academic, though the real issue requiring determination was the effect of Article 7 on taxability and the basis of computation. That amounted to a mistake apparent on the record.
Conclusion: The miscellaneous application was allowed and the earlier order was recalled for the limited purpose of fresh decision on whether, even under Article 7 of the India-Mauritius DTAA, the assessee's income was taxable in India and, if so, on what basis.