MLI (including Overview of BEPS) – A Compendium
Listed Agreement Other Contracting Provision
Number Jurisdiction
65 Article 5(4)
66 Romania Article 5(3)
67 Russia Article 5(4)
68 Saudi Arabia Article 5(4)
69 Serbia Article 5(7)
70 Singapore Article 5(3)
71 Slovakia* Article 5(4)
72 Slovenia Article 5(4)
73 South Africa Article 5(3)
74 Spain Article 5(4)
75 Sri Lanka Article 5(4)
76 Sudan Article 5(5)
77 Sweden Article 5(3)
78 Swiss Confederation Article 5(4)
79 Syria Article 5(4)
80 Tajikistan Article 5(4)
81 Tanzania Article 5(4)
82 Thailand Article 5(3)
83 Trinidad & Tobago Article 5(3)
84 Turkey Article 5(4)
85 Turkmenistan Article 5(3)
86 Uganda Article 5(4)
87 Ukraine Article 5(3)
88 United Arab Emirates Article 5(3)
89 United Kingdom Article 5(4)
90 Uruguay Article 5(3)
91 USA Article 5(3)
92 Uzbekistan Article 5(3)
93 Vietnam Article 5(3)
Zambia
(*DTAA between India and erstwhile Czechoslovakia continues to be
applicable to Slovakia)
1342
Ann 10 — INDIA’S POSITION ON BEPS & MLI
Article 16 – Mutual Agreement Procedure
Reservation
Pursuant to Article 16(5)(a) of the Convention, India reserves the right for
the first sentence of Article 16(1) not to apply to its Covered Tax Agreements
on the basis that it intends to meet the minimum standard for improving
dispute resolution under the OECD/G20 BEPS Package by ensuring that
under each of its Covered Tax Agreements(other than a Covered Tax
Agreement that permits a person to present a case to the competent
authority of either Contracting Jurisdiction), where a person considers that
the actions of one or both of the Contracting Jurisdictions result or will
result for that person in taxation not in accordance with the provisions of
the Covered Tax Agreement, irrespective of the remedies provided by the
domestic law of those Contracting Jurisdictions, that person may present the
case to the competent authority of the Contracting Jurisdiction of which the
person is a resident or, if the case presented by that person comes under a
provision of a Covered Tax Agreement relating to non-discrimination based
on nationality, to that of the Contracting Jurisdiction of which that person
is a national; and the competent authority of that Contracting Jurisdiction
will implement a bilateral notification or consultation process with the
competent authority of the other Contracting Jurisdiction for cases in which
the competent authority to which the mutual agreement procedure case was
presented does not consider the taxpayer’s objection to be justified.
Reservation is applicable to all CTAs of India provided in pursuance to
Article 2(1)(a)(ii)
Notification of Existing Provisions in Listed Agreements
Pursuant to Article 16(6)(b)(i) of the Convention, India considers that the
following agreements contain a provision that provides that a case referred
to in the first sentence of Article 16(1) must be presented within a specific
time period that is shorter than three years from the first notification of the
action resulting in taxation not in accordance with the provisions of the
Covered Tax Agreement. The article and paragraph number of each such
provision is identified below.
Listed Agreement Other Contracting Provision
Number Jurisdiction
7 Belgium Article 25(1), Second Sentence
12 Canada Article 25(1), Second Sentence
33 Italy Article 26(1), Second Sentence
87 United Arab Emirates Article 27(1), Second Sentence
1343
MLI (including Overview of BEPS) – A Compendium
Pursuant to Article 16(6)(b)(ii) of the Convention, India considers that
the following agreement(s) contain(s)a provision that provides that a case
referred to in the first sentence of Article 16(1) must be presented within
a specific time period that is at least three years from the first notification
of the action resulting in taxation not in accordance with the provisions of
the Covered Tax Agreement. The article and paragraph number of each such
provision is identified below.
Listed Agreement Other Contracting Provision
Number Jurisdiction Article 26(1), Second Sentence
Article 25(1), Second Sentence
1 Albania Article 25(1), Second Sentence
Article 25(1), Second Sentence
2 Armenia Article 27(1), Second Sentence
Article 26(1), Second Sentence
3 Australia Article 25(1), Second Sentence
Article 26(1), Second Sentence
4 Austria Article 25(1), Second Sentence
Article 27(1), Second Sentence
5 Bangladesh Article 25(1), Second Sentence
Article 25(1), Second Sentence
6 Belarus Article 25(1), Second Sentence
Article 25(1), Second Sentence
8 Bhutan Article 26(1), Second Sentence
Article 25(1), Second Sentence
9 Botswana Article 25(1), Second Sentence
Article 25(1), Second Sentence
10 Brazil Article 25(1), Second Sentence
Article 24(1), Second Sentence
11 Bulgaria Article 27(1), Second Sentence
Article 26(1), Second Sentence
13 China Article 25(1), Second Sentence
Article 25(1), Second Sentence
14 Colombia Article 26(1), Second Sentence
Article 26(1), Second Sentence
15 Croatia
16 Cyprus
17 Czech Republic
18 Denmark
20 Estonia
21 Ethiopia
22 Fiji
23 Finland
24 France
25 Georgia
26 Germany
28 Hungary
29 Iceland
30 Indonesia
1344
Ann 10 — INDIA’S POSITION ON BEPS & MLI
Listed Agreement Other Contracting Provision
Number Jurisdiction Article 25(1), Second Sentence
Article 26(1), Second Sentence
31 Ireland Article 25(1), Second Sentence
Article 25(1), Second Sentence
32 Israel Article 26(1), Second Sentence
Article 27(1), Second Sentence
34 Japan Article 26(1), Second Sentence
Article 25(1), Second Sentence
35 Jordan Article 25(1), Second Sentence
Article 25(1), Second Sentence
36 Kazakhstan Article 25(1), Second Sentence
Article 26(1), Second Sentence
37 Kenya Article 26(1), Second Sentence
Article 25(1), Second sentence
37A Kenya (New) Article 25(1), Second Sentence
Article 25(1), Second sentence
38 Korea Article 25(1), Second Sentence
Article 25(1), Second Sentence
39 Kuwait Article 26(1), Second Sentence
Article 27(1), second sentence
40 Kyrgyz Republic Article 25(1), Second Sentence
Article 25(1), Second Sentence
41 Latvia Article 25(1), Second Sentence
Article 26(1), Second Sentence
43 Lithuania Article 25(1), Second Sentence
Article 25(1), Second sentence
44 Luxembourg Article 25(1), Second Sentence
Article 26(1), Second sentence
45 Macedonia Article 26(1), Second Sentence
Article 26(1), Second Sentence
46 Malaysia Article 26(1), Second sentence
47 Malta
48 Mauritius
49 Mexico
50 Mongolia
51 Montenegro
52 Morroco
53 Mozambique
54 Myanmar
55 Namibia
56 Nepal
57 Netherlands
58 New Zealand
59 Norway
60 Oman
61 Phillipines
62 Poland
1345
MLI (including Overview of BEPS) – A Compendium
Listed Agreement Other Contracting Provision
Number Jurisdiction Article 25(1), second sentence
Article 23(1), Second Sentence
63 Portugal Article 25(1), second sentence
Article 25(1), second sentence
64 Qatar Article 24(1), Second Sentence
Article 27(1), second sentence
65 Romania Article 27(1), Second Sentence
Article 25(1), second sentence
66 Russia Article 25(1), second sentence
Article 24(1), Second Sentence
67 Saudi Arabia Article 27(1), second sentence
Article 25(1), Second Sentence
68 Serbia Article 25(1), Second Sentence
Article 26(1), second sentence
69 Singapore Article 25(1), second sentence
Article 25(1), Second Sentence
70 Slovakia* Article 25(1), Second Sentence
Article 25(1), Second Sentence
71 Slovenia Article 25(1), Second Sentence
Article 25(1), Second Sentence
72 South Africa Article 25(2), Second Sentence
Article 26(1), Second Sentence
73 Spain Article 25(1), Second Sentence
Article 26(1), second sentence
74 Sri Lanka Article 26(1), Second Sentence
Article 27(1), Second Sentence
75 Sudan Article 27(1), Second Sentence
Article 27(1), Second Sentence
76 Sweden Article 26(1), Second Sentence
77 Swiss Confederation
78 Syria
79 Tajikistan
80 Tanzania
81 Thailand
82 Trinidad and Tobago
83 Turkey
84 Turkmenistan
85 Uganda
86 Ukraine
89 Uruguay
90 USA
91 Uzbekistan
92 Vietnam
93 Zambia
(*DTAA between India and erstwhile Czechoslovakia continues to be
applicable to Slovakia)
1346
Ann 10 — INDIA’S POSITION ON BEPS & MLI
Notification of Listed Agreements Not Containing Existing Provisions
Pursuant to Article 16(6)(c)(i) of the Convention, India considers that the
following agreements do not contain a provision described in Article 16(4)(b)(i)
Listed Agreement Number Other Contracting Jurisdiction
27 Greece
49 Mexico
Pursuant to Article 16(6)(c)(ii) of the Convention, India considers that the
following agreement(s) do(es) not containa provision described in Article
16(4)(b)(ii)
Listed Agreement Number Other Contracting Jurisdiction
19 Egypt
27 Greece
42 Libya
49 Mexico
61 Phillipines
77 Swiss Confederation
88 United Kingdom
Pursuant to Article 16(6)(d)(i) of the Convention, India considers that the
following agreements do not containa provision described in Article 16(4)
(c)(i).
Listed Agreement Number Other Contracting Jurisdiction
3 Australia
19 Egypt
27 Greece
Pursuant to Article 16(6)(d)(ii) of the Convention, India considers that the
following agreements do not containa provision described in Article 16(4)
(c)(ii).
Listed Agreement Number Other Contracting Jurisdiction
3 Australia
7 Belgium
27 Greece
86 Ukraine
88 United Kingdom
1347
MLI (including Overview of BEPS) – A Compendium
Article 17 – Corresponding Adjustments
Reservation
Pursuant to Article 17(3)(a) of the Convention, India reserves the right
for the entirety of Article 17 not to apply to its Covered Tax Agreements
that already contain a provision described in Article 17(2). The following
agreements contain provisions that are within the scope of this reservation.
Listed Agreement Other Contracting Provision
Number Jurisdiction
1 Albania Article 9(2)
2 Armenia Article 9(2)
3 Australia Article 9(3)
4 Austria Article 9(2)
8 Bhutan Article 9(2)
9 Botswana Article 9(2)
12 Canada Article 9(2)
13 China Article 9(2)
14 Colombia Article 9(2)
15 Croatia Article 9(2)
16 Cyprus Article 9(2)
18 Denmark Article 10(2)
20 Estonia Article 9(2)
21 Ethiopia Article 9(2)
22 Fiji Article 9(2)
23 Finland Article 9(2)
25 Georgia Article 9(2)
28 Hungary Article 9(2)
29 Iceland Article 9(2)
30 Indonesia Article 9(2)
31 Ireland Article 9(2)
32 Israel Article 9(2)
33 Italy Article 10(2)(after amendment by
paragraph (E) of (a))
34 Japan Article 9(2)
35 Jordan Article 9(2)
1348
Ann 10 — INDIA’S POSITION ON BEPS & MLI
Listed Agreement Other Contracting Provision
Number Jurisdiction
36 Kazakhstan Article 9(2)
38 Korea Article 9(2)
39 Kuwait Article 9(2)
40 Kyrgyz Republic Article 9(2)
41 Latvia Article 9(2)
44 Luxembourg Article 9(2)
45 Macedonia Article 9(2)
46 Malaysia Article 9(2)
47 Malta Article 9(2)
49 Mexico Article 9(2)
51 Montenegro Article 9(2)
52 Morroco Article 9(2)
53 Mozambique Article 9(2)
54 Myanmar Article 9(2)
55 Namibia Article 9(2)
56 Nepal Article 9(2)
57 Netherlands Article 9(2)
58 New Zealand Article 9(2) and 9(3)
61 Phillipines Article 10(2)
62 Poland Article 10(2)
63 Portugal Article 9(2)
64 Qatar Article 9(2)
65 Romania Article 9(2)
67 Saudi Arabia Article 9(2)
68 Serbia Article 9(2)
69 Singapore Article 9(2)
71 Slovenia Article 9(2)
72 South Africa Article 9(2)
73 Spain Article 10(2)(after amendment by
Article 2 of Amending Protocol
(a))
74 Sri Lanka Article 9(2)
1349
MLI (including Overview of BEPS) – A Compendium
Listed Agreement Other Contracting Provision
Number Jurisdiction
75 Sudan Article 9(2)
78 Syria Article 9(2)
79 Tajikistan Article 9(2)
80 Tanzania Article 9(2)
81 Thailand Article 9(2)
82 Trinidad & Tobago Article 9(2)
83 Turkey Article 9(2)
84 Turkmenistan Article 9(2)
85 Uganda Article 9(2)
88 United Kingdom Article10(2)
89 Uruguay Article 9 (2)
90 USA Article 9(2)
Article 35 – Entry into Effect
Notification of Choice of Optional Provisions
Pursuant to Article 35(2) of the Convention, solely for the purpose of its own
application of Article 35(1)(a) and (5)(a), India hereby chooses to substitute
“taxable period” for “calendar year”.
Reservation
Pursuant to Article 35(7)(a) of the Convention, India reserves the right to
replace:
i) the references in Article 35(1) and (4) to “the latest of the dates on
which this Convention enters into force for each of the Contracting
Jurisdictions to the Covered Tax Agreement”; and
ii) the references in Article 35(5) to “the date of the communication
by the Depositary of the notification of the extension of the list of
agreements”;
with references to “30 days after the date of receipt by the Depositary of the
latest notification by each Contracting Jurisdiction making the reservation
described in paragraph 7of Article 35 (Entry into Effect) that it has
completed its internal procedures for the entry into effect of the provisions
of this Convention with respect to that specific Covered Tax Agreement”;
1350
Ann 10 — INDIA’S POSITION ON BEPS & MLI
iii) the references in Article 28(9)(a) to “on the date of the
communication by the Depositary of the notification of withdrawal
or replacement of the reservation”; and
iv) the reference in Article 28(9)(b) to “on the latest of the dates
on which the Convention enters into force for those Contracting
Jurisdictions”;
with references to “30 days after the date of receipt by the Depositary of the
latest notification by each Contracting Jurisdiction making the reservation
described in paragraph 7 of Article 35 (Entry into Effect) that it has
completed its internal procedures for the entry into effect of the withdrawal
or replacement of the reservation with respect to that specific Covered Tax
Agreement”;
v) the references in Article 29(6)(a) to “on the date of the
communication by the Depositary of the additional notification”;
and
vi) the reference in Article 29(6)(b) to “on the latest of the dates
on which the Convention enters into force for those Contracting
Jurisdictions”;
with references to “30 days after the date of receipt by the Depositary of the
latest notification by each Contracting Jurisdiction making the reservation
described in paragraph 7 of Article 35 (Entry into Effect) that it has
completed its internal procedures for the entry into effect of the additional
notification with respect to that specific Covered Tax Agreement”;
India has not opted for Part VI of the Convention.
1351
MLI (including Overview of BEPS) – A Compendium
11 Matching of Reservations and Notifications
under the MLI Provisions
ANNEXURE
About
The extent to which the Multilateral Instrument (MLI) modifies an existing
tax agreement depends on the MLI Positions of the Contracting Jurisdictions
and the corresponding application of the mechanical provisions of the MLI.
The interactive flowcharts included in this overview have been developed
by the OECD Secretariat to illustrate the relevant notification clauses and
other relevant mechanical provisions.
The flowcharts should not be considered legal advice on the MLI or any
other subject matter.
For more information, please contact the OECD Secretariat at
[email protected].
1352
Ann 11 — MATCHING OF RESERVATIONS AND NOTIFICATIONS UNDER THE MLI PROVISIONS
SYNOPSIS
Article 2 – Covered Tax Agreements (CTA) ............................................................ 1354
Article 3 – Transparent Entities ............................................................................... 1354
Article 4 – Dual Resident Entities ........................................................................... 1355
Article 5 – Methods for Elimination of Double Taxation ...................................... 1355
Article 6 – Purpose of a Covered Tax Agreement .................................................. 1356
Article 7 – PPT - Prevention of Treaty Abuse........................................................ 1356
Article 7 – S-LOB - Prevention of Treaty Abuse .................................................... 1357
Article 8 – Dividend Transfer Transactions ............................................................ 1357
Article 9 – Capital Gains from Alienation of Share or Interests of Entities
Deriving their Value Principally from Immovable Property..................... 1358
Article 10 – Anti-abuse Rule for Permanent Establishments Situated in
Third Jurisdictions ....................................................................................... 1358
Article 11 – Application of Tax Agreements to Restrict a Party’s Right to
Tax its Own Residents................................................................................. 1359
Article 12 – Artificial Avoidance of Permanent Establishment Status through
Commissionnaire Arrangements and Similar Strategies .......................... 1359
Article 13 – Artificial Avoidance of Permanent Establishment Status through
the Specific Activity Exemptions ............................................................... 1360
Article 14 – Splitting up of Contracts ..................................................................... 1360
Article 15 – Definition of a Person Closely Related to an Enterprise .................. 1361
Article 16(1) – 1 – Mutual Agreement Procedure (1st sentence).......................... 1361
Article 16(1) – 2 – Mutual Agreement Procedure (2nd sentence) ........................ 1362
Article 16(2) – Mutual Agreement Procedure ......................................................... 1362
Article 16(3) – Mutual Agreement Procedure ......................................................... 1363
Article 17 – Corresponding Adjustments ................................................................ 1363
Article 18 – Choice to Apply Part VI (and Compatibility) .................................... 1364
Article 19 – Mandatory Binding Arbitration........................................................... 1364
Article 23 – 1 – Type of Arbitration Process .......................................................... 1365
Article 23 – 2 – Type of Arbitration Process .......................................................... 1365
Article 24 – Agreement on a Different Resolution................................................. 1365
Article 28 – Reservation Formulated for Scope of Arbitration.............................. 1366
Article 35 – 1 – Entry into Effect ............................................................................ 1366
Article 35 – 2 – Entry into Effect ............................................................................ 1367
Article 36.................................................................................................................... 1367
Entry into Effect of Part VI....................................................................................... 1367
Entry into Force and Effect – Scenario 1 ................................................................ 1368
Entry into Force and Effect – Scenario 2 ................................................................ 1368
1353
MLI (including Overview of BEPS) – A Compendium
Article 2
Covered Tax Agreements (CTA)
The agreement is
a “Covered Tax
Yes Agreement” (CTA)
Is the agreement in
Do all parties to Yes force? No The agreement will
an income tax be a “Covered Tax
Agreement” (CTA)
agreement notify the No The agreement is after its entry into
agreement under Art.
force
2(1)(a)(ii)? not a “Covered Tax
Agreement” (CTA)
Article 3
Transparent Entities
Article 3(1): That provision
is replaced by
Does either Yes Art. 3(1) does Art. 3(1) Does either Yes Yes Art. 3(1) (as
party make Yesnot applydoes not party make
a reservation a reservation PRGL¿HG E\
under Art. 3(5) Does either apply under Art. Art.3(3))
(b)-(e) and party make 11(3)(a)?
notify that the a reservation Do all That provision
CTA is within under Art. parties notify Does is replaced by
the reservation? 3(5)(g) and either party
not notify the same Art. 3(1)
Article 3(2): that the CTA provision make a
Does either No NoYesArt. 3 doesis within theunder Art.YesreservationArt.3(1) (as
party make Nonot applyreservation? PRGL¿HG E\
a reservation 3(6)? under Art.3(3)) applies
under Art. 3(5) No-Art. 3(2) does Art.11(3) and supersedes
No Nonot apply the provisions
(a)? (a)? of the CTA to
No Art. 3(2) the extent of
Does either Yes applies incompatibility
party make a
reservation under Art. 3(1) applies
Art. 3(5)(f)? and supersedes
the provisions
of the CTA to
the extent of
incompatibility
1354
Ann 11 — MATCHING OF RESERVATIONS AND NOTIFICATIONS UNDER THE MLI PROVISIONS
Article 4
Dual Resident Entities
Does either YesArt. 4 does Does the other Art. 4 does That provision
party make Yesnot applyparty make not apply is replaced by
a reservation Yesa reservation
under Art. 4(3) Does either The last Art. 4(1)
Yesparty makeunder Art. 4(3) sentence of Art.
(a)? Yesa reservation(f)?4(1) is replacedArt. 4(1)
under Art. NoArt. 4 doeswith the text inapplies and
4(3)(b)-(d) No Nonot applyDo all supersedes
and notify parties notify Art. 4(3)(e); the provisions
that the CTA NoDoes either of the CTA to
is within the Noparty makethe same Do all parties the extent of
reservation?No a reservation provision notify the same incompatibility
under Art. 4(3) under Art. provision under
(e)? 4(4)? Art. 4(4)?
Yes That provision is
replaced by Art.
4(1)
Art. 4(1) applies
and supersedes
the provisions
of the CTA to
the extent of
incompatibility
Article 5
Methods for Elimination of Double Taxation
Does either Yes Does the party Yes Option C does The Option
party choose an that does NOT Yes not apply; chosen by such
Option under choose an Yes Does the party party applies
Art. 5(10)? Option make Art. 5 does that chooses with respect to
a reservation not apply that provision
under Art. 5(8) the other
Does the Option notify The Option
and notify party that an existing chosen by
that the CTA does NOT provision under such party
is within the choose Option Art. 5(10)? does not apply
reservation? C make a
No NoreservationDoes the The Option
NoArt. 5 does notunder Art. 5(9) party that chosen by such
apply and notify chooses an
Nothat the CTA Option notify party applies
No is within the an existing Yes with respect to
reservation? provision that provision
under Art.
The Option
5(10)? chosen by such
party does not
apply
1355
MLI (including Overview of BEPS) – A Compendium
Article 6
Purpose of a Covered Tax Agreement
Article 6(1): Yes Yes Art. 6(1) does Such preamble
not apply language is replaced
Does either Yes by the text in Art. 6(1)
party make Do all parties The text in Art. 6(1) is
a reservation notify the same included in addition to
under Art. 6(4) the existing preamble
and notify that preamble
the CTA is within language under language
the reservation?
Art. 6(5)?
Article 6(3) No
No NoDo all parties Yes The text in Art. 6(3) is
Do all Parties notify that the No included in the CTA
choose to CTA does NOT
already contain Art. 6(3) does
apply Art. 6(3) existing preamble not apply
under Art. language under
6(6)?
Art. 6(6)?
Art. 6(3) does
not apply
Article 7 – PPT
Prevention of Treaty Abuse
Is Art. 7 Art. 7 does Art. 7(1) and Art. 7(1)Yes Do all That provision is
opted out of not apply (4) do not and (4) do Yes parties replaced by Art.
entirely under apply not apply choose to
Art. 7(16)? Yes apply Art. 7(1) and (4)
Yes Do all 7(4) under
Yes parties notify Art. 7(17) Art. 7(4) does
No NoDoes either not apply; That
Does either Noparty makethe same (b)?
party make a reservation provision provision is
a reservation Nounder Art. 7(15)under Art. Do all replaced by Art.
under Art. No (b) and notify 7(17)(a)? parties
7(15)(a)?No that the CTA choose to 7(1)
is within the apply Art.
reservation? 7(4) under Art. 7(1) and
Art. 7(17) (4) apply and
Yes supersede the
(b)? provisions of the
CTA to the extent
of incompatibility
Art. 7(4) does not
apply;
Art.7(1) applies and
supersedes the
provisions of the
CTA to the extent
of incompatibility
1356
Ann 11 — MATCHING OF RESERVATIONS AND NOTIFICATIONS UNDER THE MLI PROVISIONS
Article 7 – S-LOB
Prevention of Treaty Abuse That provision
is replaced by
Does either The S-LOB does
party make not apply the S-LOB
a reservation
under Art. 7(15) Do all parties The S-LOB
(c) and notify notify the same applies and
that the CTA provision under supersedes the
is within the Art. 7(17)(c)? provisions of the
reservation? CTA to the extent
Does either of incompatibility
Yes (all)Do all of theNo party make a No No
Yes (a) Yesparties that do reservation under No No No No
Does either Yes (not all) Yes Yes YesNOT choose Art. 7(15)(c) and The S-LOB That provision is
party choose Yes Yes notify that the does not apply replaced by the
to apply the the S- LOB CTA is within the
S-LOB under choose to reservation? Do all parties S-LOB
Art. 7(17)(c)? apply Art. 7(7) notify the same
(a) or (b) under Does either party provision under The S-LOB
No Art. 7(17)(d)? Yes (b) make a reservation Art. 7(17)(c) or applies and
under Art. 7(15)(c) supersedes the
The S-LOB and notify that the (d)? provisions of the
does not apply CTA to the extent
No CTA is within the The S-LOB of incompatibility
reservation? does not apply
That provision
Does either party Do all parties is replaced
that chooses to notify the same
apply the S-LOB provision under by the S-LOB
under Art. 7(17)(c) Art. 7(17)(c) or (asymmetrically)
make a reservation
under Art. 7(16)? (d)? The S-LOB
applies and
Yes Art. 7 does not supersedes
apply the provisions
of the CTA to
The S-LOB the extent of
does not apply incompatibility
(asymmetrically)
Article 8
Dividend Transfer Transactions
Art. 8 does notYes Art. 8 does not apply Art. 8(1) applies
apply Yes to the extent that an with respect to
Yes Yes that provision
Does either Does either No No existing provision
party make a party make a No includes a period Art. 8(1) does
reservation under reservation under described in the not apply
Art. 8(3)(a)? Art. 8(3)(b)(i),No
(ii) or (iii) and reservation; Art. 8(1) applies
notify that the Do all parties notify with respect to that
CTA is within the the same provision
reservation? provision
under Art. 8(4)?
Art. 8(1) does not
Do all parties notify apply
the same provision
under Art. 8(4)?
1357
MLI (including Overview of BEPS) – A Compendium
Article 9
Capital Gains from Alienation of Share or Interests of Entities Deriving
their Value Principally from Immovable Property
Article 9(1): Art. 9(1) does Art. 9(1)(a) does Yes Art. 9(1)(b) Art. 9(1)(b)
not apply not apply; Does Yes does not applies with
Art. 9(4) does either party make respect to
not apply;No Does either No apply that provision
Does either Yes party make a reservation No
party make a reservation under Art. 9(6) Do all parties Art. 9(1)(b)
Yes under Art. 9(6) (c), or make a notify the does not apply
Do all parties a reservation No (b), or make reservation under Yes
choose to under Art. No a reservation Art. 9(6)(e) and Yes Yessame provision Art. 9(1)(a)
apply Art. 9(6)(a)? under Art. 9(6) notify that the No No under Art. applies with
9(4) under Yes (d) and notify CTA is within the No 9(7)? respect to
Art. 9(8)? Article 9(4): that the CTA that provision
is within the reservation? Art. 9(1(b)
Art. 9(1) does Yes reservation? does not Art. 9(1)
not apply; Yes Does either apply; Do all (a) does not
Does either Art. 9(4) does party make parties notify
party make not apply a reservation the same apply
under Art. 9(6) provision
a reservation Do all (c), or make a under Art. Art. 9(1)
under Art. 9(6) parties notify reservation under applies with
(f) and notify Art. 9(6)(e) and 9(7)? respect to
that the CTA the same notify that the that provision
provision CTA is within the Do all
is within the under Art. reservation? parties notify Art. 9(1)
reservation? 9(7) or (8)? does not
No That provision the same
No is replaced by provision apply
under Art.
Art. 9(4)
9(7)?
Art. 9(4)
applies and
supersedes
the provisions
of the CTA to
the extent of
incompatibility
Article 10
Anti-abuse Rule for Permanent Establishments Situated in Third
Jurisdictions
Does either YesArt. 10 does Art. 10 does That
party make Yesnot apply not apply provision is
a reservation Yes replaced by
under Art. YesDoes eitherDoes either Art. 10(1)-(3)
10(5)(a)? Noparty makeparty makeArt. 10 does
Noa reservationa reservationnot apply Art. 10(1)-(3)
Nounder Art. 10(5) under Art. apply and
No(b) and notify 10(5)(c) and Do all parties
that the CTA NOT notify notify the supersede the
is within the that the CTA provisions of
reservation? is within the same provision the CTA to
reservation? under Art. the extent of
10(6)? incompatibility
1358
Ann 11 — MATCHING OF RESERVATIONS AND NOTIFICATIONS UNDER THE MLI PROVISIONS
Article 11
Application of Tax Agreements to Restrict a Party’s Right to Tax its Own
Residents
Does either Art. 11 does Art. 11 does
party make a not apply Yes not apply
reservation under
Art. 11(3)(a)? Yes No
Do all parties
No Does either notify the same That provision
party make provision under is replaced by
a reservation Art. 11(4)? Yes Art. 11(1)
under Art. 11(3) No Art. 11(1) applies
(b) and notify and supersedes
that the CTA the provisions
is within the of the CTA to
reservation? the extent of
incompatibility
NOTE: Where either party makes a reservation under Art. 11(3)(a), the provisions of Art. 3(1) will
be modified under Art. 3(3) to ensure that its application will not interfere with the taxation by a
Contracting Jurisdiction of its residents.
Article 12
Artificial Avoidance of Permanent Establishment Status through
Commissionnaire Arrangements and Similar Strategies
Art. 12 does notYes Article 12(1): Art. 12(1) applies
apply Yes with respect to
Yes YesDo all parties notify that provision
- the same provision
Does either No No under Art. 12(5)? Art. 12(1) does
party make a No not apply
reservation under Article 12(2):
No Art. 12(2) applies
Art. 12(4)? Do all parties notify with respect to that
the same provision
under Art. 12(6)? provision
Art. 12(2) does
not apply
1359
MLI (including Overview of BEPS) – A Compendium
Article 13
Artificial Avoidance of Permanent Establishment Status through the
Specific Activity Exemptions
Yes A Does either Option A does Option A
Yes Yes party make not apply applies with
a reservation respect to
Yes under Art. Do all parties that provision
Option A/B: No 13(6)(b) and notify the
No No notify that Option A
Do all parties the CTA is same provision does not
choose to Yes B No within the under Art.
apply the reservation? 13(7)? apply
Does either Yes Art. 13 does same Option Do all parties Option B
party make not apply under Art. notify the same applies with
a reservation 13(7)? provision under respect to that
under Art. -
13(6)(a)? No Art.13(7)? provision
Neither Option Option B
applies does not
apply
Article 13(4): Yes Art. 13(4) does Art. 13(4)
Yes not apply applies with
Does either respect to that
party make Do all parties
a reservation notify the provision
under Art.
13(6)(c)? same provision Art. 13(4) does
under Art. 13 not apply
(7) or (8)?
No
No
Article 14
Splitting up of Contracts
YesArt. 14 does not Art. 14 does not That provision is
Yesapply apply with respect to replaced by
Yes Yes provisions relating to Art. 14(1)
Does either No NoDoes eitherthe exploration for or
party make a Noparty make a exploitation of natural Art. 14(1) applies
reservation under reservation under and supersedes the
Art. 14(3)(a)? NoArt. 14(3)(b) and resources;
notify that the Do all parties notify the provisions of the
CTA is within the same provision under CTA to the extent of
reservation?
Art. 14(4)? incompatibility
Do all parties notify That provision is
the same provision replaced by
under Art. 14(4)? Art. 14(1)
Art. 14(1) applies
and supersedes the
provisions of the
CTA to the extent of
incompatibility
1360
Ann 11 — MATCHING OF RESERVATIONS AND NOTIFICATIONS UNDER THE MLI PROVISIONS
Article 15
Definition of a Person Closely Related to an Enterprise
Does either party Art. 15 does not Yes Art. 15 applies
make a reservation apply No
under Art. 15(2)? Art. 15 does not
Yes apply
No Does either of Art.
12(2), 13(4) or
14(1) apply?
Article 16(1) – 1
Mutual Agreement Procedure (1st sentence)
Does either party The 1st sentence Yes That provision is
make a reservation of Art. 16(1) does No replaced by the 1st
under Art. 16(5)(a)? Yes not apply sentence of Art. 16(1)
No Do all parties notify The 1st sentence of
the same provision Art. 16(1) applies
under Art. 16(6)
(a)? and supersedes the
provisions of the
CTA to the extent of
incompatibility
1361
MLI (including Overview of BEPS) – A Compendium
Article 16(1) – 2
Mutual Agreement Procedure (2nd sentence)
Does either The 2nd That provision is
party make a sentence of
reservation under Art. 16(1) does replaced by the
Art. 16(5)(b) and Yes not apply
notify that the Yes 2nd sentence of
CTA is within the No Do all parties Art. 16(1)
reservation? notify the same
provision under No
Art. 16(6)(b)(i)? Does either party Yes The 2nd
(shorter than notify an existing No sentence of
three years) provision under Art. 16(1) does
not apply
Art. 16(6)(b)(ii)? The 2nd sentence
(at least three of Art. 16(1) applies
and supersedes the
years)
provisions of the
CTA to the extent of
incompatibility
Article 16(2)
Mutual Agreement Procedure
1st sentence The 1st sentence of
Do all parties notify
Art. 16(2) applies
Yes
the absence of an
existing provision No The 1st sentence of
under Art. 16(6)(c)(i)? Art. 16(2) does not
apply
2nd sentence: The 2nd sentence of The 2nd sentence
Art. 16(2) does not of Art. 16(2) applies
Does either party Yes apply
make a reservation
under Art. 16(5)(c)? No Do all parties notify Yes
the absence of an No The 2nd sentence of
existing provision Art. 16(2) does not
under Art. 16(6)(c)(ii)?
apply
1362
Ann 11 — MATCHING OF RESERVATIONS AND NOTIFICATIONS UNDER THE MLI PROVISIONS
Article 16(3)
Mutual Agreement Procedure
1st sentence: Yes The 1st sentence of
No Art. 16(3) applies
Do all parties notify
the absence of an The 1st sentence of
existing provision Art. 16(3) does not
under Art. 16(6)(d)(i)?
apply
2nd sentence: Yes The 2nd sentence of
No Art. 16(3) applies
Do all parties notify the
absence of an existing The 2nd sentence of
Art. 16(3) does not
provision under Art.
16(6)(d)(ii)? apply
Article 17
Corresponding Adjustments
Does either Art. 17 does
party make a not apply
reservation under
Art. 17(3)(a) and Yes
notify that the
CTA is within the No Does either Art. 17 does
reservation?
party make Yes not apply
a reservation No Do all parties That provision
under Art. 17(3) Yes is replaced by
(b) or (c)? notify the same Art. 17(1)
No
provision under
Art. 17(1) applies
Art. 17(4)? and supersedes
the provisions
of the CTA to
the extent of
incompatibility
1363
MLI (including Overview of BEPS) – A Compendium
Article 18
Choice to Apply Part VI (and Compatibility)
Does either Part VI does
party make a not apply
reservation under
Art. 26(4) and Is Part VI
notify that the opted out
CTA is within the of under
reservation? Art. 23(7)?
Part VI does
not apply
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Do both NoPart VI doesPart VI does
parties not apply not apply
choose to No
apply Part No Do both That provision
VI under Art. parties notify is replaced by
No
18? Is Part VI Yes the same Part VI
opted out of No provision
under Art. Part VI
under Art. applies and
28(2)? 26(1)? supersedes
the provisions
of the CTA to
the extent of
incompatibility
Article 19
Mandatory Binding Arbitration
Period in Article 19(1)(b): The two-year period in
Art. 19(1)(b) is replaced
Does either party Yes with a three-year period
make a reservation No
under Art. 19(11)?
Nothing changes
Rules in Article 19(12): Yes The rules in Art.
No 19(12) apply
Does either party
make a reservation Nothing changes
under Art. 19(12)?
1364
Ann 11 — MATCHING OF RESERVATIONS AND NOTIFICATIONS UNDER THE MLI PROVISIONS
Article 23 – 1
Type of Arbitration Process
Art. 19 does not apply
until both competent
authorities reach an
Does either Party Yes agreement on the type
make a reservation of arbitration process
under Art. 23(3)? No Arbitration process
Yes
Does either Party in Art. 23(2) applies
make a reservation No Arbitration process (“independent
under Art. 23(2)?
in Art. 23(1) applies opinion”)
³¿QDO RႇHU´
Article 23 – 2
Type of Arbitration Process
Does either Party
that does NOT Does the other
choose to apply party that Part VI does
Art. 23(5) make not apply
chooses to apply Yes
a reservation No
under Art. 23(6) Art. 23(5) make
and notify that
Yes a reservation
under Art. 23(7)?
Does either the CTA is within No Art. 23(5) does
Party choose Yes the reservation? not apply
Art. 23(5)
to apply Art. No Art. 23(5) applies
23(5) under Art. does not
23(4)? apply
Article 24
Agreement on a Different Resolution
Does Art. 23(2) Yes Art. 24(2)
apply to the applies
CTA?
Does either Yes No
party make a No Art. 24(2)
Do both parties reservation under applies Art. 24(2) does
choose to apply Yes Art. 24(3)? not apply
Art. 24(2) under
No Art. 24(2)
Art. 24(1)? does not
apply
1365
MLI (including Overview of BEPS) – A Compendium
Article 28
Reservation Formulated for Scope of Arbitration
Part VI does not
Does the other Yes apply
party object to the
Does either reservation under The reservation
party formulate a Yes Art. 28(2)(b)? No applies
reservation under No
Art. 28(2)(a)?
Nothing changes
Article 35 – 1
Entry into Effect
Period in Article 35(1)(b): Yes Such shorter period applies
No Nothing changes
Do all parties notify
the same period as a
shorter period than six
calendar months under
Art. 35(1)(b)?
Article 35(2): For the purpose of the Party’s
Yes application, “calendar year” applies
Does either party
choose to apply Art. No Nothing changes
35(2)?
Article 35(3): For the purpose of the party’s
Does either party Yes application, “1 January of the next
choose to apply Art. year” applies
35(3)? No
Nothing changes
1366
Ann 11 — MATCHING OF RESERVATIONS AND NOTIFICATIONS UNDER THE MLI PROVISIONS
Article 35 – 2
Entry into Effect
Period in Article 35(5)(b): Yes Such shorter period applies
No Nothing changes
'R DOO SDUWLHV QRWL¿HG
the same period as a Yes Art. 35(4) does not apply
shorter period than nine No Nothing changes
calendar months under
Art. 35(5)(b)?
Article 35(4):
Does either party
make a reservation
under Art. 35(6)?
Article 35(7)(a): (QWU\ LQWR HႇHFW ZLOO GHSHQG RQ
Does either party Yes completion of internal procedures
make a reservation in the reserving party applies
under Art. 35(7)(a)?
No
Nothing changes
Article 36
Entry into Effect of Part VI
Do both parties notify Yes Cases prior to entry into
a mutual agreement No force of the Convention shall
between competent be considered to have been
authorities and the agreed presented on the agreed date
date under Art. 36(1)(b)?
Nothing changes
Does either party make a Yes Part VI applies
reservation under No retroactively only to the
Art. 36(2)? extent that the competent
authorities agree
Nothing changes
1367
MLI (including Overview of BEPS) – A Compendium
Entry into Force and Effect – Scenario 1
Jurisdiction Entry into Jurisdiction B 7KH QHZ PRGL¿HG SURYLVLRQV
force of the of the Covered Tax Agreement
A deposits its MLI itself (i.e. deposits its
5 jurisdictions WDNH HႇHFW DFFRUGLQJ WR $UW
instrument of have deposit) instrument of 35 of the MLI, the choices and
UDWL¿FDWLRQ RI WKH UDWL¿FDWLRQ RI reservations of the Contracting
MLI the MLI Jurisdictions
Entry into force Entry into force
of the MLI for of the MLI for
Jurisdiction A Jurisdiction B
The Covered Tax
Agreement between
$ DQG % LV PRGL¿HG
Entry into Force and Effect – Scenario 2
Entry into Jurisdiction A Jurisdiction B 7KH QHZ PRGL¿HG SURYLVLRQV
force of the of the Covered Tax Agreement
deposits its deposits its
MLI itself WDNH HႇHFW DFFRUGLQJ WR $UW
instrument of instrument of 35 of the MLI, the choices and
UDWL¿FDWLRQ RI UDWL¿FDWLRQ RI reservations of the Contracting
the MLI the MLI Jurisdictions
Entry into force Entry into force
of the MLI for of the MLI for
Jurisdiction A Jurisdiction B
The Covered Tax
Agreement between
$ DQG % LV PRGL¿HG
1368
CASE LAWS INDEX
Case Laws Index
A
ABA and UCO Bank v. CIT [1999] 237 ITR 889 (SC)........................................... 269
ADIT v. Merrill Lynch Capital Market Espana SASV
(2017) 167 ITD 194 (Mum). ........................................................................... 333
Alta Energy Luxembourg SARL 2018 TCC 152. ............................................ 206, 268
Alta Energy Luxembourg SARL v. the Queen 2018 TCC 152............................... 303
Anil Purshottam Kakad v. Tax Recovery Officer 1993(2) Mh. L.J. 1049. ............. 311
Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co. Ltd. v. DIT [2010] 332 ITR 340. ............ 793
Azadi Bachao Andolan case (2003) 132 Taxmann 373. ........................................ 793
Azadi Bachao Andolan was John N. Gladden v. Her majesty the Queen
85 DTC 5188 ................................................................................................... 582
B
Bamadev Panigrahi v. Monorama Raj AIR 1974 AP 226 ..................................... 318
Besix Kier Dabhol SA v. DDIT (131 ITD 299) ...................................................... 685
Bhoruka Engineering Ind. Ltd. v. DCIT (2013) 356 ITR 25 (Kar). ........................ 298
Board of Revenue, Chepauk, Madras v. K. Venkataswami Naidu
AIR 1955 Mad 620.......................................................................................... 318
Burakar Coal Co. Ltd. v. Union of India, AIR 1961 SC......................................... 581
C
C.I.T. v. Mugneeram Bangur and Co. (1965) 57 ITR 299 (SC).............................. 311
CCE, Ahmedabad v. Solid & Correct Engineering Works 2010 (5) SCC 122. ...... 322
Chedda Housing Development Corp. v. Bibijan Shaikh Farid
2007 (3) MhLj 402. ......................................................................................... 309
CIT v. Cargill Global Trading Pvt Ltd [CC 19572/2011 and
CC 21458/2011 (SC)] ...................................................................................... 700
CIT v. Cocanada Radhaswamy Bank [(1965) 57 ITR 306 SC]. ............................. 709
CIT v. Herbalife International India (P) Ltd (2016) 384 ITR 276. ........................ 840
CIT v. P.V.A. L. Kulandagan Chettiar [2004] 137 Taxmann 460 (SC). .................. 793
CIT v. Sterling Investment Corpn. Ltd [1980] 123 ITR 441.................................. 313
CIT v. Tata Services Ltd [1980] 122 ITR 594 (Bom).............................................. 313
CIT v. Vijay Flexible Containers (1990) 186 ITR 693 (Bom). ............................... 313
D
Daimler Chrysler India (P.) Ltd [2009] 29 SOT 202 (Pune Trib.). ........................ 212
Dalkia International SA Talin Court Circuit (TCC) 29 Oct 2015.......................... 334
1369
MLI (including Overview of BEPS) – A Compendium
DCIT v. Maya Appliances (P) Ltd. (2017) 82 taxmann.com 447 (Chennai-Trib.).300
DDIT v. A. P. Moller (2014) 64 SOT 147 (Mumbai Tribunal) ............................. 141
DIT (International Taxation) v. Morgan Stanley & Co. Inc. (2007) 292 ITR 416. 836
DIT v. Vanenburg Facilities BV [2017] 82 taxmann.com 433 (Andhra Pradesh). 332
DIT, IT - II v. Besix Kier Dabhol SA [2012] 26 taxmann.com 169 (Bombay)...... 686
Duncan’s Industries Limited v. State of U. P. (2000) 1 SCC 633.......................... 307
F
France v. Zimmer Ltd.; March 2010; Conseil D’Etat (Supreme Administrative
Court, CE) in FR: CE, 31 Mar. 2010, Cases Nos. 304715 and 308525. ....... 411
G
Google India (P) Ltd. v. Addl CIT (2017) (190 TTJ 409) ...................................... 824
Gramophone & Typewriter Ltd v. Stanley (1908-10) MJL ER 83J......................... 297
H
Hemendra Lal Roy v. Indo-Swiss Trading Co. Ltd. AIR 1935 Pat 375................. 317
Holland v. Hodgson (1871-72) LR 7 CP 328. ......................................................... 321
I
ImmoEast Beteiligungs GmBH Case 8-3/2603........................................................ 331
Indostar Capital TS-250-HC-2019 (Bom) ............................................................... 239
Indostar Capital v. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation)
TS-250-HC-2019 (Bom) ................................................................................. 268
Irfan Abdul Kader Fazlani v. ACIT (2013) 29 taxmann.com 424 (Mumbai-Trib.).299
Ishikawajima – Harima Heavy Industries Ltd. (2007) 288 ITR 408 ..................... 847
ITO v. Right Florists (P.) Ltd (2013) (25 ITR_Trib 639), Mumbai ITAT .............. 824
J
J. H. Subhiah v. Govindrao AIR 1953 Nag 224...................................................... 316
J. Kuppanna Chetty v. Collector of Anantpur AIR 1965 AP 457.......................... 316
Jencal Holdings Ltd. v. Her Majesty the Queen, 2019 TCC 16 ............................ 269
Jnam Chand v. Jugal Kishore AIR 1960 Cal 331.................................................... 316
K
Kenneth Solomon v. Dan Singh Bawa AIR 1986 Delhi 1. .................................... 313
Keshavanand Bharti v. State of Kerala, AIR 1973 SC 1461 ................................. 581
KIIC Investment Company TS-708-ITAT-2018(Mum)............................................ 889
Klaus Vogel Commentary [P No. 9 of 1995 In re (1996) 220 ITR 377 (AAR) ..... 283
Kotak Mahindra Finance Ltd v. State of Maharashtra 2002(2) Mh LJ 486. ......... 310
1370
CASE LAWS INDEX
L
Leigh v. Taylor (1902) AC 15. ................................................................................ 320
Linklaters LLP [2010] 40 SOT 51 (Mum.).............................................................. 211
Linklaters LLP v. ITO (2010) 40 SOT 51 (Mumbai Tribunal)............................... 141
M
M/s. Shaha Ratansi Khimji & Sons v. Proposed Kumbhar Sons Hotel P. Ltd.
(2014) 14 SCC 1.............................................................................................. 314
M/s. T.T.G. Industries Ltd. v. CCE, Raipur 2004 (167) ELT 501 (SC)................... 323
Mahomed Ibrahim v. Northern Circars Fibre Trading Co., Coconada
(1944) 2 Mad LJ 60. ........................................................................................ 316
Mrs. Bacha F. Guzdar v. CIT (1955) 27 ITR 1 (SC). .............................................. 297
Mrs. Punnika Parikh, In re, [2012] 19 taxmann.com 314 (AAR).......................... 333
Municipal Corp. of Greater Bombay v. Indian Oil Corp. Ltd.
1990 SCALE (2)1140....................................................................................... 323
N
Narayanbhai Mahijibhai Patel v. Dolatram Chauharmal AIR 1972 Guj 166........ 317
O
OSK David v. L Rethinam M.P.(MD). No.1 of 2015. .............................................. 304
P
P.V.A.L. Kulandagan Chattiar 208 ITR 400. ............................................................ 384
Perumal Naicker v. T. Ramaswami Kone AIR 1969 Mad 346. .............................. 314
Pinstrom Technologies (P) Ltd v. ITO (2013) (154 TTJ 173) ................................ 824
Prahlad Dalsukhrai v. Maganlal Muljibhai Tewar AIR 1952 Bom 454................. 312
Punjab Urban Development Authority v. Dashmesh Educational Society
(2005) 139 PLR 238. ....................................................................................... 314
R
Ram Baran Prasad v. Ram Mohit Hazra AIR 1967 SC 744. .................................. 313
Ram Jethmalani v. Union of India [2011] 339 ITR 107 (SC). ............................... 115
Ram Jethmalani v. UOI (2011) 8 SCC 1. ................................................................ 785
Ram Jiawan and Anr. v. Hanuman Prasad and Ors. AIR 1940 Oudh 409........... 310
Re Berubari Union (I), Special Reference No. 1 of 1959 (1960) 3 SCR 250 ..... 581
Reynolds v. Ashby & Son (1904) AC 466............................................................... 306
S
Sanofi Pasteur Holding SA v. Dept. of Revenue, Ministry of Finance
354 ITR 316 (AP). ........................................................................................... 331
1371
MLI (including Overview of BEPS) – A Compendium
Schellenberg Witmmer In re (2012) 253 CTR 178 (AAR). ................................... 141
Shakti Insulated Wires Ltd v. JCIT 87 ITD 56 (Mumbai)...................................... 312
Shell Technology India Private Limited (2012) 345 ITR 2016.............................. 367
Shri Rajeev Sureshbhai Gajwani v. ACIT [2011] 129 ITD 145
(Ahmedabad Tribunal) .................................................................................. 201
Sikandar and Ors. v. Bahadur and Ors. XXVII Indian Law Reporter, 462. ......... 309
Sirpur Paper Mills (1998) 1 SCC 400. .................................................................... 307
Smt. Dropadi Devi v. Ram Das and Ors. AIR 1974 All 473. ................................ 310
Soni Lalji Jetha v. Soni Kalidas Davchand AIR 1967 SC 978............................... 314
Spain v. Dell, June 2016, Supreme Court, Case No. 1475/2016. .......................... 413
State Bank of Patiala v. Chohan Huhtamaki (India) Pvt. Ltd. AIR 1982 HP 27. . 320
Sukry Kurdepa v. Goondakull (1872)6 Mad. H.C. 71. .......................................... 318
T
Tata Iron and Sons v. Deputy CIT [1999] 69 ITD 292 (Mum.)............................. 229
TCS v. State of Andhra Pradesh AIR 2005 SC 371 ............................................... 852
Timken India Ltd v. CIT [2002] 256 ITR 460. ....................................................... 229
Triveni Engineering & Indus. Ltd. 2000 (120) ELT 273 (SC). ............................... 308
Turquoise Investment and Finance Limited 267 ITR 654..................................... 383
U
Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan (2003) 263 ITR 706 (SC) ............ 283, 582
Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan [(2004) 10 SCC 1] ............................... 785
UOI v. V. Krishnamurthy (1994) 2 MLJ 630........................................................... 318
Utkal Contractors and Joinery Pvt. Ltd. And others v. State of Orissa
and others; AIR 1987 S.C. 1454 .................................................................... 581
V
Vijay Ship Breaking Corporation v. CIT [(2009) 314 ITR 309 (SC)]. ................... 700
Vodafone International Holdings B. V. v. UOI. (2012) 341 ITR 1 (SC). ............... 297
Voltas Ltd. v. ITO [2017] 183 TTJ 788 (Mumbai - Trib.). ..................................... 313
Y
Yahoo India (P) Ltd (2011) (140 TTJ 195) ............................................................. 824
1372