2016 (7) TMI 1377 - AT - Income Tax

Applicability of benefits of Article 8 of DTAA between India and Germany on freight income - claim of the Assessing Officer was that though in principle assessee was eligible for the benefits under Article-8 of the India-Germany, DTAA, but the profits relating to the goods transported through feeder vessels would not qualify for the benefits of Article -8 of the treaty - Held that - In a similar situation in assessment year 2007-08, the Tribunal in assessee s own case following the judgment of the Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of DIT (IT) vs. Balaji Shipping U.K. Ltd., (2012 (8) TMI 681 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT) held that the benefits of the DTAA between India and Germany would be available to the assessee even in respect of revenues earned from Feeder vessels obtained by the assessee by slot hire arrangements. - Decided against revenue

Summary

Issues:
- Interpretation of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) between India and Germany.
- Taxability of income derived from operation of ships in international traffic.
- Applicability of DTAA benefits on freight income.
- Challenge against the directions of Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP).
- Effect of pending appeal in High Court on Tribunal's order.

Analysis:
1. Interpretation of DTAA: The case involved the interpretation of Article 8 of the DTAA between India and Germany concerning the taxability of income derived from the operation of ships in international traffic. The respondent, a foreign shipping company, claimed that its income was not taxable in India but only in Germany, based on the DTAA provisions.

2. Taxability of Income: The respondent asserted that the profits from the operation of ships in international traffic were not taxable in India as per the DTAA. The Assessing Officer contended that profits related to goods transported through feeder vessels might not qualify for DTAA benefits. However, the DRP, relying on a previous Tribunal decision and a High Court judgment, directed the benefits of DTAA to be applied to the income earned from feeder vessels.

3. Applicability of DTAA Benefits: The Tribunal upheld the DRP's decision, stating that the earlier Tribunal order in the respondent's case for a different assessment year was still valid. The Tribunal found no reason to interfere with the DRP's directions, emphasizing that the mere filing of an appeal did not invalidate the existing Tribunal order.

4. Challenge against DRP's Directions: The Revenue challenged the DRP's directions based on the pending appeal in the High Court. However, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, highlighting that the Tribunal's previous order remained in force and had not been overturned by a higher authority.

5. Effect of Pending Appeal: The Tribunal's decision in the appeal for the assessment year 2006-07 was deemed applicable to the subsequent years as the facts and circumstances were similar. Consequently, all the Revenue's appeals for the various assessment years were dismissed based on the findings in the initial appeal.

In conclusion, the Tribunal affirmed the application of DTAA benefits to the respondent's income earned from the operation of ships in international traffic, including revenue from feeder vessels. The Tribunal's decision was based on the consistency of its previous orders and the lack of alteration by higher authorities, thereby dismissing the Revenue's appeals across multiple assessment years.