Income Tax

Rollback provision in revised India-Korea Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) – CBDT Clarification

Rollback provision in revised India-Korea DTAA-CBDT Clarification. Applications for bilateral APA for international transactions with Associated Enterprises 

Clarification by Central Board of Direct Taxes on rollback provision in the revised India-Korea Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement

The Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) has clarified that under the revised India-Korea Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA), applications for bilateral Advance Pricing Agreement (APA) involving international transactions with Associated Enterprises in Korea for the APA period beginning Fiscal Year 2017-18 can be filed along with request for rollback provision in prescribed form. Such requests for rollback provision shall be processed in accordance with the provisions of Income Tax Act i.e. section 92CC(9A) of the Income Tax Act 1961, and the applicable Income Tax rules in this regard. Inclusion of rollback provision in such bilateral APAs would also be subject to the applicable regulations in Korea. The CBDT has issued the present clarification in response to the queries received from taxpayers regarding availability of rollback provision in respect of bilateral APA applications for APA period beginning F.Y 2017-18.

The existing DTAA between India and Korea was signed on 19th July, 1985 and was notified on 26th September 1986. A revised DTAA between India and Korea for the Avoidance of Double Taxation and the Prevention of Fiscal evasion with respect to taxes on income was signed on 18th May 2015 and entered into force on 12th September 2016. Amongst other changes, the revised DTAA incorporates para 2 in Article 9 (Associated Enterprises). Article 9(2) of the revised India-Korea DTAA provides recourse to the taxpayers of both countries to apply for Mutual Agreement Procedure (MAP) in transfer pricing disputes as well as apply for Bilateral APAs for APA period beginning F.Y. 2017-18.

*****
Share

Recent Posts

  • Income Tax

Non-deduction of TDS does not make transaction as unexplained in the hands of deductee – ITAT

Mere non-deduction of TDS by the deductor on a transaction does not change the character of the transaction to make…

6 hours ago
  • ICAI

Last date to submit MEF 2026-27 extended to 09.09.2026

ICAI has extended the last date to online submit Multipurpose Empanelment Form (MEF)- 2026-27 from 29th August 2026 to 9th…

8 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Validity of demand u/s 156 for default u/s 115-O, if assessment order u/s 143(3) has Nil demand

Can a demand notice be issued u/s 156 for non-payment of Dividend tax u/s 115-O, when as per assessment order…

2 days ago
  • Income Tax

Issue already examined and adjudicated by CIT(Appeals), can’t be reopened on same set of facts

The issue already examined and adjudicated by the quasi-judicial authority, i.e., CIT(Appeals), cannot be reopened on the same set of…

3 days ago
  • Income Tax

TDS can’t be denied for non deposit of tax deducted by the deductor – High Court

One TDS is deducted, credit has to follow, failure of deductor to deposit the amount to the credit of the…

4 days ago
  • Income Tax

Cash withdrawal from bank can’t be taxed u/s 69C as unexplained expenditure – ITAT

Merely because assessee did not explain purpose of cash withdrawal from bank, it can not be taxed u/s 69C as…

4 days ago