https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356096 The Tribunal held that a rectification application filed after the limitation amendment was still governed by the earlier four-year period, because the order sought to be corrected predated the amendment and the curtailed limitation could not extinguish an existing right. It also found that the assessee had raised the India-UK DTAA rate in its written submissions, making the omission to apply the treaty rate an apparent mistake from the record. Applying section 90(2), the Tribunal directed taxation of fees for technical services at the more beneficial treaty rate rather than under section 115A, with grossing up where tax was borne by the payer. en-us Fri, 02 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 24 Feb 2018 08:23:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356096 The Tribunal held that a rectification application filed after the limitation amendment was still governed by the earlier four-year period, because the order sought to be corrected predated the amendment and the curtailed limitation could not extinguish an existing right. It also found that the assessee had raised the India-UK DTAA rate in its written submissions, making the omission to apply the treaty rate an apparent mistake from the record. Applying section 90(2), the Tribunal directed taxation of fees for technical services at the more beneficial treaty rate rather than under section 115A, with grossing up where tax was borne by the payer. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 02 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356096