JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A. v. Dy.CIT (2020) 185 DTR 305 /203 TTJ 443 (Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Interest received by head office is chargeable to tax or not is a debatable issue-Revision cannot be initiated on the basis of retrospective amendment as the AO has to proceed on the basis of law prevailing as on the date of assessments-Revision is held to be not valid-DTAA-India-USA. [S. 9(1)(v)(c), Art.14(6)]

Allowing the appeal the Tribunal held that,  revision cannot be initiated on the basis of  retrospective amendment as the AO has to  proceed on the basis of law prevailing as on the date of assessments. Revision is held to be not valid. whether or not interest received by the Head Office/overseas Branches from the Indian Branch is taxable in India is a highly debatable issue and the position of law prevailing at the time of completion of assessments as per the available judicial precedents on the issue, clearly held that the interest income was not taxable as it is governed by the principle of mutuality. Therefore, it cannot be said that it is not a possible view.(AY. 2011-12, 2012-13)