R. A. K. Ceramics v. DCIT ( 2019) 176 DTR 345/ 199 TTJ 273 (Hyd.)(Trib.), www.itatonline.org

S. 90 : Double taxation relief-Interest-Royalty–Levy of surcharge and 3% education cess on tax computed-Held to be not valid- DTAA-India-UAE. [Art. 2(1), 11, 12]

Allowing the appeal of the assessee the Tribunal held that, Article 2(1) of the India-UAE DTAA provides that the taxes covered shall include tax and surcharge thereon. Education cess is nothing but an additional surcharge & is also covered by the definition of taxes. The Tribunal held that the provisions of India UAE Double taxation Avoidance Agreement are pari materia with the provisions of India Singapore DTAA, which was subject matter of consideration in DIC Asia Pacific  Pte Ltd v ADIT ( 2012) 18 ITR 358 (Kol.) (Trib.). Accordingly the appeal of the assessee is allowed . Tribunal also referred following cases in support, Capgemini SA v. Dy.CIT (IT)-2 (1) [13-07-2016] [2016] 72 taxmann.com 58 (Mum) (Trib.), Dy. DIT v. J.P. Morgan Securities Asia (P.) Ltd. [23-10-2013] [2014] 42 taxmann.com 33 (Mum) Trib.), Dy. DIT (IT)-1(1),v. BOC Group Ltd. [30-11-2015] [2015] 64 taxmann.com 386 (Kol.)(Trib.), Everest Industries Ltd. v. JCIT [31-01-2018], [2018] 90 taxmann.com 330 (Mum)(Trib.), Soregam SA v. Dy.DIT(IT) [30-11-2018] [2019] 101 taxmann.com 94 (Delhi) (Trib.), and Sunil V. Motiani v. ITO (IT(1) [27-02-2013] [2013] 33 taxmann.com 252 (Mum) (Trib.). (ITA No. 2043/Hyd/18, dt. 29.03.2019)(AY. 2012-13)