High Court Of Madras
CIT vs. Mrs. Rajamani Raman
Sections 15, DTAA Art. 18(3)
V.S. Sirpurkar & N.V. Balasubramanian, JJ.
Tax Case No. 749 of 1999
10th July, 2002
Counsel Appeared
T.C.A. Ramanujam, for the Applicant
JUDGMENT
V.S. SIRPURKAR, J. :
The question referred for our consideration is :
“Whether on the fats and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the pension received by the assessee from the Malaysian Government could not be assessed as salary under the IT Act, 1961 ?
2. The question is referred at the instance of the Revenue. The Tribunal in its order relying on Art. 18(3) and 18(5) of the Agreement for Avoidance of Double Taxation of income entered into between the Government of India and Government of Malaysia has held that the pension received was not taxable in India, since it was liable for tax in Malaysia, which was the Contracting State. There will be no question of its inviting the taxation in India, which would amount to double taxation. The Tribunal has pointed out that the University of Malaysia is statutory authority and as such would fall within the term “Government” and, therefore, the person paid by the University of Malasia as in the present case would have to be construed for the purpose of the agreement as a pension received from the Government, which is taxable in terms of Art. 18(3) in Malaysia by Government of Malaysia. We do not find anything wrong in the order and it is absolutely correct and we confirm the same. the question is, therefore, answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. No costs.
[Citation : 258 ITR 710]
