India: Exclusion of overseas dividend from indirect transfer provisions

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Garden, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

India: Exclusion of overseas dividend from indirect transfer provisions

nayak.jpg

jain.jpg

Rajendra Nayak


Aastha Jain

Under the Indian Tax Law (ITL), income arising from any asset in India or from transfer of a capital asset situated in India would be taxable in India. In 2012, the ITL was retroactively amended to introduce provisions for the taxation of indirect transfer (IDT provisions) under which it was clarified that an asset or a capital asset being any share in a foreign company shall be deemed to be situated in India, if such shares derive their value substantially from the assets located in India. Accordingly, transfer of such deemed asset was taxable in India. The legislative intent of such provision was to tax gains having an economic nexus with India, irrespective of the mode of realisation of such gains. Apprehensions were raised by various stakeholders on the overreaching scope of deeming fiction under the IDT provisions, which deems the shares of a foreign company to be situated in India. Concern was raised that the provisions would result in taxation in India of dividend income declared by such foreign company outside India. This was perceived as an unintended consequence of the IDT provisions.

The Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT), the apex administrative body for taxation in India, recently issued a circular (Circular 4 of 2015) to clarify that:

  • the IDT provisions would trigger tax for the transaction which has the effect of transferring, directly or indirectly, the underlying assets located in India, as income accruing or arising in India; and

  • declaration of dividend by a foreign company outside India does not have an effect of transfer of any underlying asset located in India. Accordingly, such dividend paid by foreign company would not be taxable in India by virtue of the IDT provisions of the ITL.

This clarification from the CBDT addresses the concern which had arisen on account of the wide scope of the IDT provisions. This is also in line with the intent of the present Indian Government to provide certainty and stability in India's tax regime.

Rajendra Nayak (rajendra.nayak@in.ey.com) and Aastha Jain (aastha.jain@in.ey.com)

Ernst & Young

Tel: +91 80 6727 5275

Website: www.ey.com/india

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

The UK tax authority’s deputy director of large business also reassured taxpayers that HMRC will not ‘nitpick’ returns
Sucafina’s tax chief was speaking at the ITR Pillar 2 Forum in London alongside experts from HMRC and other organisations
India’s Supreme Court rattled cross‑border structuring with its Tiger Global ruling. Subsequent rule changes narrowed the impact, but significant risks around GAAR, substance and treaty access persist
The UK-based big four spin-off firm has hired Marc Lien, who declared that most AI in professional services today is ‘cosmetic’
Projected revenue losses and exemption requests are harming the project’s capability and viability
HMRC secured lengthy prison sentences in a major payroll VAT fraud case, while law firms announced tax promotions and hires
Significant changes include an update to profit markers and an alteration to how an ‘inbound distributor’ is defined
ITR sat down for a pre-event interview with Tim Zech, WTS Germany, and Jeff Soar, WTS UK, keynote speaker at next week’s ITR AI in Tax Forum 2026 in London
Brazil’s bid to seek US-style exemptions from pillar two is ‘highly advantageous’ for multinationals, ITR has also heard
India is signalling flexibility on expat taxation to attract foreign expertise, though employers will need to navigate disclosure, treaty and scope uncertainties
Gift this article