TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>DTAA overrides Section 206AA for non-residents without PAN, tax deducted at treaty rate, not higher domestic rate</h1> <h3>The Commissioner Of Income Tax & Anr. Versus M/s. Manthan Software Services Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Mphasis Ltd., M/s. Wipro Ltd.</h3> SC held that in cases involving non-resident assessees without PAN, where there is an applicable DTAA (here, India-Netherlands), the DTAA prevails over ... Rate of deduction of tax in the case of a non-resident who does not have a PAN - provisions of Section 206AA overrides the provisions of the Double Tax Avoidance Agreement or not? - DTAA between India and Netherlands - HC decided [2022 (12) TMI 1587 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] questions of law are answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. Respondent(s) submitted that the issues raised in these Special Leave Petitions are covered by the order of Air India Ltd.[2023 (7) TMI 289 - SC ORDER] as held DTAA acquires primacy in such cases, where reciprocating states mutually agree upon acceptable principles for tax treatment, the provision in Section 206AA (as it existed) has to be read down to mean that where the deductee i.e the overseas resident business concern conducts its operation from a territory, whose Government has entered into a Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement with India, the rate of taxation would be as dictated by the provisions of the treaty HELD THAT:- Taking note of the submissions made at the bar and further noting the fact that the issues raised in these Special Leave Petitions are squarely covered by the aforesaid case wherein this Court has dismissed the Special Leave Petitions, we consequently apply the said decision to these cases also and dismiss the Special Leave Petitions The Supreme Court addressed Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) in which the respondent's senior counsel contended that the issues were already covered by an earlier order dated 04.07.2023 in SLP(C) Diary No. 19016/2023, titled 'Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation) 1 vs. Air India Ltd.' That prior order had stated: 'Delay condoned. This Court is of the opinion that the impugned order does not call for interference. The special leave petition is accordingly dismissed. All pending applications are disposed of.' Accepting the submission that the present SLPs raised issues 'squarely covered' by the aforesaid decision, the Court held that the same reasoning applied here. Consequently, the SLPs were dismissed following the earlier precedent, and all pending applications in these matters were also disposed of.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
