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...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
Page of 4782
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
21 to 40 of 95633 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Permanent establishment requirements under Article 5 of the India-US DTAA were not met because the Revenue did not establish that the associated enterprise's project office was available to the assessee or that it habitually concluded contracts, maintained stock, or secured orders for it. No fixed place PE or dependent agent PE existed, so no profit attribution arose. Separate offshore supply and repair agreements were supported by the bid terms and contractual arrangements; supplies, repairs and transfer of title occurred outside India. The allegation of artificial contract splitting lacked support. Accordingly, offshore supply, repair and refurbishment receipts were not taxable in India, and the assessment order was set aside.
Permanent establishment requirements under Article 5 of the India-US DTAA were not met because the Revenue did not establish that the associated enterprise's project office was available to the assessee or that it habitually concluded contracts, maintained stock, or secured orders for it. No fixed place PE or dependent agent PE existed, so no profit attribution arose. Separate offshore supply and repair agreements were supported by the bid terms and contractual arrangements; supplies, repairs and transfer of title occurred outside India. The allegation of artificial contract splitting lacked support. Accordingly, offshore supply, repair and refurbishment receipts were not taxable in India, and the assessment order was set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.