Clean slate principle extinguishes uncrystallised operational claims and bars continuation of pending recovery and arbitral proceedings after plan app...
Works contract classification governs composite layout-development contracts where VAT-paid goods are transferred alongside construction and infrastru...
Specified income tax exemption for pollution control body remains conditional on non-commercial activity, unchanged income character, and return filin...
Jurisdictional facts in certificate-of-origin discrepancies can support customs show-cause proceedings, leaving factual explanations for departmental ...
Minimum alternate tax provisions under section 115JA did not...
Minimum alternate tax exclusions for pre-amendment banking companies and expatriate Indian branch salaries remain outside head office expenditure limits.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
Minimum alternate tax provisions under section 115JA did not apply to a banking company governed by the Banking Regulation Act before the Finance Act 2012 amendment, following the stated position on the successor provision, section 115JB. Salary paid outside India to expatriate employees posted with an Indian branch permanent establishment was not head office expenditure because the employees were employed in India; the statutory limitation on head office expenditure under section 44C therefore did not apply. The appeal proceeded only on issues concerning allocated direct expenses and NRI Desk expenses, while the other questions were not entertained.
Minimum alternate tax provisions under section 115JA did not apply to a banking company governed by the Banking Regulation Act before the Finance Act 2012 amendment, following the stated position on the successor provision, section 115JB. Salary paid outside India to expatriate employees posted with an Indian branch permanent establishment was not head office expenditure because the employees were employed in India; the statutory limitation on head office expenditure under section 44C therefore did not apply. The appeal proceeded only on issues concerning allocated direct expenses and NRI Desk expenses, while the other questions were not entertained.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4782
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
