Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Preliminary-expense amortisation and MAT exempt-income adjustments prevailed, while trademark costs and managerial remuneration require fresh verifica...
Export valuation requires contemporaneous evidence; unrelated invoices cannot prove overvaluation, and dual penalties on firm and partner are impermis...
Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
Nature-dependent electricity contracts receive new Ind AS accounting, hedge designation, transition and financial-statement disclosure requirements fr...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
241 to 260 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.