Delay in furnishing TRC justifiable. ITAT Allows benefit of India-USA DTAA

 Share
Delay in furnishing TRC justifiable. ITAT Allows benefit of India-USA DTAA

The Income Tax Appellant Tribunal finds Assessee's reasons behind filing of TRC before CIT(A) instead of Assessing Officer is justifiable

In this case, the Assessee-Individual, a non-resident, in his return of income for AY 2014-15 sought to avail special rates of tax on income from fixed deposits and bank deposits under the India-USA DTAA

Assessee's claim was denied by the AO as the Assessee failed to furnish TRC and information in Form No. 10F under Rule 21AB during the course of assessment proceedings

Assessee's furnished TRC and Form No. 10F as additional evidence before CIT(A) who also rejected Assessee's claim due to delay in furnishing TRC and Form No.10F by holding that Rule 21AB casts an obligation on the assessee to maintain and furnish the documents, therefore, the said information ought to have been available with the Assessee at the time of filing of the return of income itself and was required to furnish TRC and Form No.10F and thus, held that the Assessee failed to comply with the mandate of Section 90(4)/(5).

The Hon'ble ITAT Directs the Assessing Officer to determine the taxability on interest income as per the special rate of tax under the India-USA DTAA.

Rule 21AB(2A) provides as under:

(2A) The assessee shall keep and maintain such documents as are necessary to substantiate the information provided under sub-rule (1) and an income-tax authority may require the assessee to provide the said documents in relation to a claim by the said assessee of any relief under an agreement referred to in sub-section (1) of section 90 or sub-section (1) of section 90A, as the case may be.]
The Tribunal considered the facts of the case at length and held as under:

After perusing the aforesaid facts, we are of the considered view that there were justifiable reasons for the assessee in not filing the TRC in the course of the assessment proceedings. But then, we cannot also remain oblivious of the fact that the A.O had declined to apply the special rate of tax as per the DTAA, for the reason, that the assessee had failed to substantiate that the interest income in question was offered by him for tax in his return of income filed in U.S.A. As observed by us hereinabove, the very basis of rejection of the assessee‟s claim for applying of special rate of tax as per the India-USA DTAA by the A.O is absolutely misconceived and in fact misplaced. As stated by the ld. A.R, and rightly so, the assessee was not seeking credit of taxes paid on his income abroad, but was seeking taxing of his interest income as per the special rates on the basis of the India-USA DTAA. Considering the fact that the assessee had filed the TRC with the A.O though after the conclusion of the assessment, coupled with the reasons that had led to delay in obtaining of the same alongwith the Form 10F, we are unable to persuade ourselves to the summarily rejection or in fact discarding of the same by the CIT(A). We, thus, in the backdrop of our aforesaid deliberations, are of the considered view, that as the assessee had filed the TRC and Form 10F, therefore, there was no justification in declining the applying of the special rate of tax qua the interest income on fixed deposits & bank interest...

Accordingly, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee and finds Assessee's reasons behind filing of TRC before CIT(A) instead of Assessing Officer is justifiable.


Tags: 
[ Published on: 18-08-2021 ]
 Share

SIMILAR ARTICLES