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)
Delhi Tribunal rules that court-approved capital reduction cannot be re-characterized as buy-back
This Tax Alert summarizes a recent ruling of the Delhi Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal) in case of Seaview Developers Pvt. Ltd. (T...
-
ITC is blocked on motor vehicles having seating capacity ≤ 13 persons (including the driver) used for the transportation of persons. Furth...
-
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...
-
Selling a property can trigger a significant tax liability in the form of capital gains tax. However, the Income-tax Act, 1961, allows you...
-
Section 68 -Cash credits Section 69 -Unexplained investments Section 69A - Unexplained money, etc Section 69B -Amount of investme...
-
Clarifications from the GST Council The GST Council has recommended the following clarifications on ISD and cross charge:
-
The Indian tax landscape has witnessed several significant judicial pronouncements in recent months. From the Supreme Court to various Hig...
-
The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has recently notified the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Amendment Rules, 2025, introducing important p...
-
Income Tax Department had clarify that the renting of mobile tower would attract lower TDS Deductions u/s. 194-I and not u/s...
-
LEASE-DEED (A brief Introduction) Lease defined. A lease of immovable property is a transfer of a right to enjoy such property, mad...
-
The Goods and Services Tax (GST) regime continues to evolve through judicial interpretations. From the Supreme Court to various High Court...
No comments:
Post a Comment