The person receiving the Indian income, not the person paying it. If you are a non-resident claiming a treaty rate on interest, dividends, royalties, fees or gains arising in India, the certificate is yours to obtain, in your name, from the revenue authority of the country you are resident in. The Indian payer role is only to hold a copy before it deducts, and to deduct at the full domestic rate if it does not have one. That division matters when a payer offers to sort the paperwork out: it cannot, because only your own authority can certify your residency.
Who needs a tax residency certificate (TRC)?
- 15+Years of the founder's cross-border experience
- 18,000+Clients served across our offices in India, the USA, Canada and the UAE
- 5.0Google rating
- 4Global offices — India, USA, Canada & UAE
Non-residents claiming treaty benefits on Indian-source income. The obligation is decided by facts rather than by tax owing, which is why a nil position does not remove it.
The rule on who files
Non-residents claiming treaty benefits on Indian-source income.

The exception
India requires the certificate from the treaty partner's authority, for the right period, in the right name. Obtaining it is a foreign-authority process with its own lead time, and the Indian deduction is applied at the full rate until it arrives.
How to get this moving
The full treatment — who it binds, the deadline, the penalty and the fixed fee — is on Tax residency certificate (TRC) — inbound in India. If that describes your position, the next step is a short call — not a form.
Reviewed for the 2025 and 2026 filing seasons by Udit Gupta, International Tax, Cross-Border Tax & Transfer Pricing Expert, Legal Quotient Consultants. Written as general guidance, not as a recommendation for your situation. Talk it through with us before acting on it.
Files that look like this one
Deciding which joint holder needed a certificate for Indian deposit interest
A husband and wife held Indian deposits jointly, and the bank had been deducting at the domestic rate on the whole of the interest. Only one of them had obtained a certificate, and it had been given to the bank with no explanation of whose income the interest was. We established the beneficial split from the source of the funds, obtained a certificate for the other holder from the same authority, and lodged both with the branch under a covering note setting out the shares. The engagement produced treaty-rate deduction on the full interest credit from the following period.
Read how this one runsA certificate obtained for the wrong period and reissued before the next payment
The client had applied for a certificate promptly and for the period that felt natural, which was the year in which the application was made rather than the year the Indian income arose in. The payer rejected it. We identified the period the income actually fell into, made a fresh application to the issuing authority with the dates evidenced, and kept the payer deduction decision open in the meantime. The engagement produced a certificate covering the correct period, lodged with the payer, and a note on file recording which period each future application would have to name.
Read how this one runsFull-rate deduction absorbed while an application sat with the issuing authority
There was no way to accelerate the foreign authority, and the Indian payment date would not move. Rather than pretend otherwise, we planned around it. The client was told what the deduction on the imminent payment would be, the certificate application was progressed and evidenced, and the Indian recovery for the difference was scoped before the payment was made. The engagement produced a certificate on file for later payments and a documented recovery route for the one deduction that could not be avoided.
Read how this one runsReconciling a certificate name with a payer records before a dividend was paid
The certificate and the shareholder register did not agree, because the shares had been acquired before a change of name and never updated. The registrar compliance team would not apply the treaty rate to a document it could not match. We settled which form of the name would be used, supported the link between the versions with the underlying civil documents, and had the register brought into line before the dividend was declared. The engagement produced a matched set of documents and a treaty-rate deduction on that dividend rather than a recovery claim afterwards.
Read how this one runsEstablishing which country could certify residency in a year of arrival
The client had moved during the year, and both countries had a reasonable claim on the residency question. Applying to the wrong authority would have produced a certificate no Indian payer would accept for the period the income arose in. We worked through the residence position under the relevant treaty tie-breaker, decided which authority could properly certify the period, and applied there. The engagement produced a certificate that matched the period of the Indian income, and a written residence analysis the client could hand to either authority if the question were reopened.
Read how this one runsA certificate needed in a company name rather than its director name
The Indian fees were payable to a corporate recipient, and the certificate produced was the director personal one. The payer was right to refuse it. We established the corporate residence position, applied to the revenue authority for a certificate in the company own name for the period concerned, and dealt with the payer queries about who the contracting party was. The engagement produced a certificate matching the recipient named on the invoice and the contract, and a treaty rate applied to the fees when the next payment was made.
Read how this one runsTreaty Rate Refused Because the Paperwork Was Missing
A reduced rate under a treaty is available only where the payer is satisfied the recipient is resident in the treaty country. The certificate and the withholding form are what make the rate available at source instead of recoverable a year later.
Read how this one runsComing Back to Canada After Years Abroad
Returning restarts Canadian residence and re-values what you own on the day you arrive. Foreign pensions, employer plans and accounts opened abroad each land differently, and the reporting thresholds are tested against the whole portfolio rather than each account.
Read how this one runsAll case studies — every published engagement in one place.
Core International & Cross-Border Tax Services
Strategy and compliance for income, assets and families spread across borders.
Industries & Client Types We Serve Worldwide
- Foreign VAT / GST / sales tax registrations
- Marketplace withholding reviews
- Inventory nexus & PE analysis
- Multi-currency books reconciled
- Cross-border revenue sourcing & withholding
- IP structuring with real substance
- Equity for cross-border teams
- U.S. expansion: entity & PE setup
Firms and partners working across borders meet Regulation 105 withholding, PE risk on long engagements and per-country payroll for travelling staff.
A partnership is taxed in the hands of its partners, so one engagement abroad can reach every partner's personal return. The order matters: the waiver is applied for before the invoice, the presence is tracked before it becomes an establishment, and the payroll is registered before the first day worked in the other country.
- Reg 105 / 102 waivers
- Permanent establishment risk
- Partner mobility planning
- Cross-border withholding recovery
- Section 216 rental returns
- FIRPTA withholding recovery
- Section 116 clearance
- Treaty credit optimization
- Transfer pricing documentation (s.247)
- Customs value vs transfer price
- Foreign affiliate reporting (T1134)
- Country-by-country reporting
- Reg 105 & U.S. CWA agreements
- Multi-state & country calendars
- Touring income allocation
- Royalty & image-rights withholding
- Residency analysis before moving
- Employer payroll exposure
- Totalization & social security
- Foreign tax credits
- Treaty access & PPT reviews
- FAPI & surplus computations
- Withholding-efficient routing
- Governance & substance
What people ask us about Tax residency certificate (TRC)
If you want the treaty rate on that interest, yes. A bank is a payer like any other and applies the deduction the law gives it. Without a certificate in your name for the period the interest arises in, it deducts at the domestic rate for non-residents, and it will keep doing so at every interest credit until the certificate is on its file. Banks also tend to want the document lodged at branch or relationship level, so allow for their internal routing as well as for the issuing authority own lead time.
The one you are resident in. India does not issue the certificate it asks for; it requires the certificate of the treaty partner, issued by that country revenue authority under that country procedure. For a Canadian resident that means applying to the Canada Revenue Agency. This is why the document cannot be produced to order from the Indian end, and why the lead time is outside anybody control on the Indian side. It is also why a certificate issued for some other purpose, or by any body other than the revenue authority, will not do.
Not usually. The certificate speaks to a period, and income arising outside that period is not covered by it. In practice a recurring stream of Indian income, such as deposit interest, dividends on a long-held holding or rent, needs the certificate renewed and lodged again with the payer for each period concerned, and needs it in hand before the payment rather than after. The common failure is not the first year, which everybody remembers, but the year after, where the payer quietly reverts to the domestic rate because the file has expired.
Yes, and it is one of the commonest reasons relief is refused at source. India requires the certificate in the right name, and a payer comparing a certificate against its own records will stop where they differ: a married name, an initial expanded on one document and not the other, a transliteration. The payer is not being obstructive, since it carries the deduction risk. The correction has to be made where the mismatch is, which is often at the issuing authority rather than in India, so reconcile every document against one form of the name before anything is lodged.
Each holder, separately and in their own name. A certificate naming one joint holder does not evidence the residency of the other, and a payer working through a joint account will apply the treaty rate only to the share of the person it holds a certificate for. Where holders are resident in different countries the position is more awkward still, because each has to apply to a different authority under a different procedure, and a different treaty may govern each share. Establish whose income each share actually is before anyone applies for anything.
Form 67 is the claim for foreign tax credit in an Indian return, filed online before you file the return it relates to. It reports the foreign income, the tax paid abroad and the treaty article relied on, and it needs the foreign tax evidence behind it. File it late or leave it out and the credit is at risk even when the underlying tax was genuinely paid. See foreign tax credit in India.
Yes. Dividends are taxed in the shareholder's hands, and the paying company withholds on payment to a non-resident. The treaty can reduce that withholding, but only if the documents are with the company before it pays: a tax residency certificate from your country, Form 10F, and a PAN on the register. Without them the domestic rate applies and your route back to the difference is a refund claim on an Indian return. See residency certificates and Form 10F.



