Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
A fresh claim that software distribution receipts were not taxable as royalty was entertainable in appeal against an intimation under section 143(1), because there is no estoppel against law and tax can be collected only by authority of law. The later ruling in Engineering Analysis supported the assessee's right to contest the taxability despite having originally offered the receipts as income. On merits, software receipts would not be royalty if the distribution agreements conveyed only a limited right to resell copyrighted articles, without any transfer of copyright or rights to modify, copy or sub-license. As the agreements had not been examined on facts, the matter was remanded for limited verification of the nature of the software products and rights transferred.
A fresh claim that software distribution receipts were not taxable as royalty was entertainable in appeal against an intimation under section 143(1), because there is no estoppel against law and tax can be collected only by authority of law. The later ruling in Engineering Analysis supported the assessee's right to contest the taxability despite having originally offered the receipts as income. On merits, software receipts would not be royalty if the distribution agreements conveyed only a limited right to resell copyrighted articles, without any transfer of copyright or rights to modify, copy or sub-license. As the agreements had not been examined on facts, the matter was remanded for limited verification of the nature of the software products and rights transferred.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4796
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
