Income Tax

Amendment to India-France Double Taxation Avoidance Convention

Government of India and France sign the Amending Protocol to amend the India-France Double Taxation Avoidance Convention

CBT has stated that during the recent visit of the President of France to India, the Government of the Republic of India and the Government of the French Republic have signed a Protocol amending the India- France Double Taxation Avoidance Convention, signed on 29 September 1992 (‘India-France DTAC’).

According to the Press Release issued in this regard, the Amending Protocol provides full taxing rights in respect of capital gains arising from sale of shares of a company, to the jurisdiction where such company is a resident. The Amending Protocol also deletes the so-called Most-Favoured-Nation (MFN) Clause from the Protocol to the DTAC, thereby bringing to rest all issues relating to it. The Amending Protocol also modifies the taxation of income from dividends by replacing a single rate of 10% of tax with a split rate of 5% for those holding at least ten percent of capital and 15% of tax for all other cases. It also modifies the definition of ‘Fees for Technical Services’ by aligning it with the definition in India US Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement, and expands the scope of ‘Permanent Establishment’ by adding Service PE.

It is further stated that the Amending Protocol also updates the provisions on Exchange of Information and introduces a new Article on Assistance in Collection of Taxes, as per international standards. This would enable and facilitate seamless exchange of information and strengthen mutual tax cooperation between India and France. The Amending Protocol also incorporates within the DTAC, the applicable provisions of BEPS Multilateral Instrument (MLI), that had already become applicable consequent to the signing and ratification of MLI by India and France.

However, the changes shall enter into effect subsequent to the completion of internal procedures under the laws of both the countries and subject to the terms agreed between the two countries. 

Share

Recent Posts

  • consumer-protection

Compensation to borrower upheld as bank did not verify construction progress before loan disbursals to builder

Bank was liable to pay compensation to borrower as it did not verify the progress of construction before loan disbursals…

14 hours ago
  • Prevention of Money Laundering Act 2002

No timeline mentioned in PMLA to forward arrest order & material in possession to Adjudicating Authority

No timeline mentioned in PMLA to forward the arrest order and the material in possession to the Adjudicating Authority. It…

17 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Release of seized assets if mandatory on completion of 120 days? Question referred to Larger Bench

Whether the release of seized assets is mandatory upon completion of 120 days –High Court refers the case to a…

2 days ago
  • Uncategorized

EPFO Extends date of filing of new ECR for the wage month September to 31/10/2026

EPFO Extends date of filing of new ECR for the wage month September to 31st October 2026 Taking into account…

3 days ago
  • Income Tax

Earlier acceptance is relevant evidence in evaluating subsequent allegation of fictitious investment

Earlier acceptance of investment is a relevant evidence in evaluating subsequent allegation that investments were fictitious from inception – High…

3 days ago
  • Income Tax

A bald statement recorded during survey can not be basis for any addition

A bald statement recorded during survey would not in itself be a foundation for any addition - ITAT In a…

5 days ago