#DTAA

ITAT Mumbai rules that Dividend Distribution Tax (DDT) under Section 115-O cannot exceed the lower rate prescribed in the India-Switzerland Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA). The decision reinforces treaty supremacy under Section 90(2) of the Income Tax Act, directly impacting multinational corporations distributing dividends to foreign shareholders.

The ITAT Pune has ruled that failure to file Form 67 by the due date does not extinguish the right to claim Foreign Tax Credit under the India-USA DTAA, as compliance is procedural and directory, not mandatory. This empowers taxpayers with legitimate foreign tax payments to secure credit even with technical delays, reinforcing substance over form in international tax disputes.

Payments for onsite software services to foreign entities do not attract TDS under Section 195 unless the assessee gains access to proprietary technical knowledge or know-how. ITAT Bangalore clarifies that mere presence of foreign personnel in India for implementation or support does not satisfy the 'make available' condition, significantly narrowing the scope of deemed fees for technical services and offering relief to IT firms relying on global onsite teams.

The ITAT Delhi has ruled that fees paid for credit ratings and surveillance services do not qualify as royalty or fees for technical services under the India-Singapore DTAA unless there is a transfer of technical know-how to the client. This sets a crucial precedent for multinational rating agencies and foreign service providers, clarifying the taxability of intangible services in cross-border transactions.

The ITAT Mumbai has ruled that income earned by non-resident shipping companies from cargo transported via feeder vessels under slot arrangements constitutes shipping profits under Article 8 of the India-Germany DTAA, exempting it from Indian taxation under Section 44B. This clarifies that ancillary logistics supporting international shipping are integral to the core shipping activity, benefiting global liner operators using feeder networks to access shallow Indian ports.

The ITAT Delhi has ruled that payments for satellite bandwidth services do not qualify as royalty under Section 9(1)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, even after the Finance Act 2012’s clarificatory amendments. This affirms that Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements take precedence over domestic tax law changes, protecting foreign service providers from retrospective TDS demands and setting a critical precedent for cross-border digital infrastructure payments.

ITAT Mumbai held that payments for offshore software supply do not constitute 'royalty' under the India-Germany DTAA, shielding foreign entities from Indian tax liability. The tribunal also ruled that consortium contracts between foreign companies do not form an 'Association of Persons' (AOP), ensuring taxation on a receipt basis per treaty provisions rather than aggregate income.

The ITAT Pune held that non-filing of Form 67 by the due date is a procedural irregularity, not a substantive bar to claiming Foreign Tax Credit under a Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement. This ruling protects resident taxpayers from losing legitimate tax relief due to administrative delays, reinforcing that DTAA obligations override rigid rule enforcement under the Income Tax Act.

The ITAT Mumbai ruled that denying foreign tax credit under Section 90/90A solely for delayed submission of US tax documents violates treaty relief principles, provided the taxpayer furnishes complete, verifiable evidence of foreign tax paid before final assessment. This sets a vital precedent for NRIs and cross-border earners facing procedural delays in foreign tax documentation.

ITAT Bangalore holds that software licensing fees without transfer of copyright or source code do not constitute 'royalty' or 'fees for technical services' under the Indo-Swiss DTAA, aligning with the Supreme Court's Engineering Analysis ruling. This decision reinforces the distinction between business profits and taxable royalty, impacting multinational software vendors and tax authorities.

ITAT Agra rules that foreign tax credit claims under Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements (DTAA) cannot be invalidated merely due to delayed Form 67 filing. The tribunal held that Rule 128(9) of the Income Tax Rules is procedural, not mandatory, and treaty rights prevail over procedural non-compliance, offering relief to taxpayers with foreign income.

ITAT Delhi rules that delivery order charges received by Turkish Airlines are integral to international air transport profits under Article 8 of the India-Turkey DTAA, making them taxable only in Turkey. The decision clarifies that ancillary charges directly connected to air cargo operations fall within the scope of 'international traffic' and are exempt from Indian taxation.

ITAT Delhi rules that belated filing of Form 67 does not extinguish the substantive right to claim Foreign Tax Credit under DTAA, reinforcing that procedural defects cannot override treaty-based entitlements. The decision applies Delhi HC precedent, ensuring taxpayers retain FTC claims despite administrative delays.

ITAT Indore holds that belated filing of Form 67 does not disentitle taxpayer to FTC under Section 90/90A, as it is a directory requirement and DTAA rights prevail.