Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
221 to 240 of 96092 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Withholding tax on payments to non-residents arises only where the sum is chargeable to tax in India. The note states that commission and allied payments were made outside India to non-resident recipients for services rendered outside India, with no permanent establishment or business connection in India. The view that commission became taxable merely because the order was executed in India was rejected, and there was no material to treat the payments as fees for technical services. As no income accrued or arose in India, tax deduction at source was not required and disallowance for non-deduction was not warranted; the deletion of the disallowance was upheld.
Withholding tax on payments to non-residents arises only where the sum is chargeable to tax in India. The note states that commission and allied payments were made outside India to non-resident recipients for services rendered outside India, with no permanent establishment or business connection in India. The view that commission became taxable merely because the order was executed in India was rejected, and there was no material to treat the payments as fees for technical services. As no income accrued or arose in India, tax deduction at source was not required and disallowance for non-deduction was not warranted; the deletion of the disallowance was upheld.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.