<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Lufthansa Wins Challenge Against Withholding Tax Rate Change Under India-Germany DTAA Article 8</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=87047</link>
    <description>The HC quashed the Assessing Officer&#039;s rejection of the petitioner&#039;s application for nil withholding tax certificate under s195(3) and s197 of the Income Tax Act. The Court noted that the petitioner, a German tax resident operating aircraft in international traffic, had received nil withholding certificates for over a decade with no change in the nature of services rendered. The income was not chargeable to tax in India under Article 8 of the India-Germany DTAA. The AO failed to provide adequate reasoning for imposing a 0.10% withholding rate instead of the nil rate claimed. Given the petitioner&#039;s consistent tax treatment in previous years and the imminent expiry of FY 2024-25, the Court declined to remand the matter and invalidated the impugned certificate.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2025 08:35:27 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2025 08:35:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=811092" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Lufthansa Wins Challenge Against Withholding Tax Rate Change Under India-Germany DTAA Article 8</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=87047</link>
      <description>The HC quashed the Assessing Officer&#039;s rejection of the petitioner&#039;s application for nil withholding tax certificate under s195(3) and s197 of the Income Tax Act. The Court noted that the petitioner, a German tax resident operating aircraft in international traffic, had received nil withholding certificates for over a decade with no change in the nature of services rendered. The income was not chargeable to tax in India under Article 8 of the India-Germany DTAA. The AO failed to provide adequate reasoning for imposing a 0.10% withholding rate instead of the nil rate claimed. Given the petitioner&#039;s consistent tax treatment in previous years and the imminent expiry of FY 2024-25, the Court declined to remand the matter and invalidated the impugned certificate.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2025 08:35:27 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=87047</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>