In a writ petition filed by the assessee for lower deduction of tax  the issue before the High Court was as to what should be the withholding rate of tax in respect of dividend. On an application made for lower deduction of tax at source, the Assessing Officer held that the tax deductible will be at 10 %.  On writ the Court held that the Protocol formed an integral part of the Convention. Therefore, plainly read, no separate notification was required, in so far as the applicability of provisions of the Protocol was concerned. The best interpretative tool that could be employed to glean the intent of the contracting States in framing clause IV(2) of the Protocol would be as to how the other contracting State (i. e., the Netherlands) has interpreted the provision. The decree issued by the Kingdom of the Netherlands on February 28, 2012 published on March 13, 2012 clearly showed that the Netherlands had interpreted clause IV(2) of the Protocol appended to the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement in a manner, which was, that the lower rate of tax set forth in the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between India and Slovenia would be applicable on the date when Slovenia became a member of the OECD, i. e., from August 21, 2010, although, the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between India and Slovenia came into force on February 17, 2005. Therefore, participation dividend paid by companies resident in the Netherlands to a body resident in India would bear a lower withholding tax rate of 5 per cent. The other contracting State, i. e., the Netherlands had interpreted clause IV(2) in a particular way and therefore in the fitness of things, the principle of common interpretation should apply on all fours to ensure consistency and equal allocation of tax claims between the contracting States. The certificates were not valid. Directed too issue a fresh certificate under section 197 of the Act which would indicate that the rate of withholding tax, in the facts and circumstances of the case would be 5 percent.