Assessee is engaged in business of providing IT and IT enabled services, declared and paid dividend to its holding company, a company incorporated in Mauritius and in respect of such dividend, assessee paid Dividend Distribution Tax (DDT).Based on assessee’s return, DDT was assessed by CPC as being payable at rate of 20.36 per cent. Assessee became aware that, as per section 90, it was entitled to benefit of DTAA between India and Mauritius, namely, concessional rate specified in article 10(2). Accordingly, assessee filed application for revision under section 264 before Principal Commissioner-Application was rejected on grounds that assessee could have filed a revised return or an appeal under section 248. On writ the Court held that  first ground of rejection in impugned order was untenable, as time limit for filing revised return had expired.Further since section 248 applies to a case where tax deducted on payments made under section 195 to a non-resident, other than by way of interest, is required to be borne by person by whom income is payable as per contract or arrangement between parties and person making deduction claims that tax was not payable whereas instant case pertained to declaration and distribution of dividend by assessee to its shareholders and tax payable thereon, and, thus, impugned order was to be set aside and matter was to be remanded back to Principal Commissioner for reconsideration on merits. (AY. 2018-19)