Rajkot ITAT holds that
income of assessee (a UAE Co.) arising from operation of ships in India, not
taxable, grants relief under Article 8 of India-UAE DTAA for AY 2008-09;
Revenue had denied treaty benefits claiming that assessee could not be treated
as a resident of UAE considering that its directors and shareholders were not
UAE residents and its AGM was held outside UAE; ITAT notes that assessee
was ‘liable to tax’ in UAE by the virtue of incorporation in UAE and hence it
satisfied the ‘residency condition’, further rejects Revenue's invocation of
tie breaker rule under Article 4(4) (which determines residence based on place
of effective management - POEM) holding it would come into play when the
assessee is resident of both the Contracting States, however, it is not AO's
case that assessee is a resident of India; Also upholds CIT(A)’s observation
that since the Board meetings and important decisions were taken at Dubai
and senior staff including MD were resident of Dubai, assessee’s POEM was
in UAE, further upholds CIT(A)’s order that place of holding of AGM and
residential status of shareholders are not relevant factor for determining
residential status of the company; Similarly, ITAT rejects Revenue’s invocation
of Limitation of Benefit (‘LOB’) clause under Article 29 of India-UAE treaty on
the ground that entire share capital of the assessee was held by German
entities, holds that in order to invoke Article 29, “what is to be established
is that if the assessee company was not to be formed in the UAE, the assessee
would not have been entitled for such benefits”, relies upon MUR Shipping
DMC Co ruling; ITAT holds that whether the company was to be formed in UAE or
in Germany, would not have made any material difference as the Indo-German DTAA
also grants similar treaty protection with regard to taxability of shipping
profits:ITAT
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Kolkata ITAT holds Husband's HUF not falling in the definition of ‘Relative’ of a Wife for gift-tax purposes under Income-tax
Kolkata Tribunal has recently ruled that HUFs cannot be treated as “relatives” under the gift-tax provisions of the Income-tax Act, thereb...
-
A new website launched for TDS related matters www.tdscpc.gov.in TRACES – T DS R econciliation A nalysis and C orrection E nabling S yste...
-
Introduction: ADR’S, GDR’S: These are commonly known as Depository Receipts (‘DR’), a negotiable security issued outside India by a deposi...
-
In the case of "Maya Gopinathan vs Anoop SB 2024 INSC 334," the Hon'ble Supreme Court provided insightful guidance on the de...
-
Particulars in Part 1 and Part 2 of Step-2 of registration form are required to be exactly the same as reported in the TDS statement. Plea...
-
An eminent concern within the GST framework pertains to the entitlement of Input Tax Credit (ITC) concerning expenditures associated with In...
-
In Standard Castings Private Limited v. ITO , the Hon’ble ITAT Delhi allowed the assessee’s appeal and set aside a demand that had continu...
-
Introduction Employee welfare is a cornerstone of corporate responsibility, and gratuity forms a critical part of the social security benefi...
-
The Approving Panel under General Anti-Avoidance Rules (GAAR), in a landmark direction, has characterized the demerger of Digital, Media a...
-
Section 68 -Cash credits Section 69 -Unexplained investments Section 69A - Unexplained money, etc Section 69B -Amount of investme...
-
This Tax Alert summarizes a recent ruling [1] of the Karnataka High Court (HC) on whether the two-year time limit prescribed under Sectio...
No comments:
Post a Comment