Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2016 (1) TMI 814 - AAR - Income Tax

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        High Court rules settlement amount not taxable under Income-tax Act, deems it capital receipt. Section 195 not applicable. The Delhi High Court set aside the Authority for Advance Rulings' decision that the settlement amount was chargeable under the Income-tax Act, ruling that ...
                      Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                          High Court rules settlement amount not taxable under Income-tax Act, deems it capital receipt. Section 195 not applicable.

                          The Delhi High Court set aside the Authority for Advance Rulings' decision that the settlement amount was chargeable under the Income-tax Act, ruling that it was a capital receipt and not taxable unless specifically provided for. The AAR also determined that Section 195 did not apply to the transfer of the settlement amount to the Qualified Settlement Fund (QSF) or its distribution to claimants since it was not chargeable. Consequently, the questions regarding tax deduction rates were deemed irrelevant. The ruling was issued on 12th January 2015.




                          Issues Involved:
                          1. Chargeability of Settlement Amount under the provisions of the Act in the hands of the Qualified Settlement Fund (QSF).
                          2. Applicability of Section 195 of the Act for deducting tax at source on the transfer of the Settlement Amount to the QSF.
                          3. Applicability of Section 195 of the Act when QSF distributes the Settlement Amount to the Authorized Claimants.
                          4. Rate of income tax deduction under Section 195 if the Settlement Amount is chargeable.
                          5. Rate of income tax deduction under Section 195 if QSF is required to deduct income tax.

                          Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

                          1. Chargeability of Settlement Amount under the provisions of the Act in the hands of the QSF:
                          The Authority for Advance Rulings (AAR) initially ruled that the settlement amount would be regarded as a sum chargeable under the provisions of the Act as required under Section 195 of the Act. However, the Delhi High Court set aside this ruling, stating that the AAR had proceeded on the wrong premise that the petitioner had accepted the receipts as revenue receipts. The High Court directed the AAR to re-examine whether the receipts were capital or revenue in nature and determine their chargeability to income tax in India. Upon re-examination, the AAR concluded that the settlement amount is a capital receipt because it was received in lieu of the surrender of the right to sue and not to compensate for any loss of income. As a capital receipt, it falls outside the scope of income chargeable to tax unless specifically brought within the ambit of income by way of specific provisions of the Income-tax Act.

                          2. Applicability of Section 195 of the Act for deducting tax at source on the transfer of the Settlement Amount to the QSF:
                          The AAR initially ruled that the tax should be deducted when the amount is moved from the segregated account in India to the initial escrow account in the US. However, upon re-examination, the AAR concluded that since the settlement amount is a capital receipt and not chargeable to tax, Section 195 does not apply. The Revenue argued that the machinery provisions of TDS had already been acted upon, and the taxes had been deducted and paid by Satyam. The AAR agreed that the questions related to the deduction of tax at source had lost their relevance because the taxes had already been deducted and paid.

                          3. Applicability of Section 195 of the Act when QSF distributes the Settlement Amount to the Authorized Claimants:
                          The AAR initially did not provide a separate ruling on this question, as it was covered by the ruling on the second question. Upon re-examination, the AAR concluded that since the settlement amount is not chargeable to tax, Section 195 does not apply when the QSF distributes the settlement amount to the authorized claimants.

                          4. Rate of income tax deduction under Section 195 if the Settlement Amount is chargeable:
                          The AAR initially ruled that the rate at which the tax is to be deducted is 30%. However, upon re-examination, the AAR concluded that since the settlement amount is not chargeable to tax, the question of the rate of income tax deduction does not arise.

                          5. Rate of income tax deduction under Section 195 if QSF is required to deduct income tax:
                          The AAR initially ruled that the rate at which the tax is to be deducted is 30%. However, upon re-examination, the AAR concluded that since the settlement amount is not chargeable to tax, the question of the rate of income tax deduction does not arise.

                          Conclusion:
                          The AAR ruled that the settlement amount payable/paid by Satyam under the stipulation to the QSF pursuant to the judgment and final approval of the US Court cannot be regarded as a sum chargeable under the provisions of the Act in the hands of QSF. Consequently, the questions related to the deduction of tax at source and the rate of deduction became irrelevant. The ruling was pronounced on 12th January 2015.
                          Full Summary is available for active users!
                          Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                          Topics

                          ActsIncome Tax
                          No Records Found