Court held that Supreme Court in Assessing Officer v. Nestle SA (2023) 155 taxmann.com 384 (SC) \u00a0held that for a party to claim benefit of a “same treatment” clause, based on entry of DTAA between India and another state which is member of OECD, relevant date is entering into treaty with India and not a later date, when, after entering into DTAA with India, such country becomes an OECD member, in terms of India’s practice.Further, a stipulation in a DTAA or a protocol with one nation requires same treatment in respect to a matter covered by its terms, subsequent to its being entered into when another nation (which is member of a multilateral organization such as OECD), is given better treatment, does not automatically lead to integration of such term extending same benefit in regard to a matter covered in DTAA of first nation, which entered into DTAA with India, and thus, terms of earlier DTAA would require to be amended through a separate notification under section 90 Since issue raised by assessee was covered by said decision of Supreme Court, writ petition was to be closed.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
S. 90 :Double taxation relief-A notification under section 90(1) would be a mandatory condition to give effect to a DTAA, or any protocol changing its terms or conditions, which would have effect of altering existing provisions of law; for a party to claim benefit of a same treatment clause, based on entry of DTAA between India and another state which is member of OECD, relevant date would be entering into treaty with India and not a later date, when, after entering into DTAA with India, such country becomes an OECD member, in terms of India’s practice-OECD Model Convention-art, 24-Writ petition is dismissed. [ITR. 128, Art. 226] <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-46373","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-c3X","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/46373","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=46373"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/46373\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":55797,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/46373\/revisions\/55797"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=46373"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=46373"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=46373"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}