Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
TDS u/s 195 - payment for time charter higher charges are Royalty u/s 9(1)(vi) - The Tribunal held that the payments made by Jaisu Shipping Co. Pvt. Ltd. for hiring dredgers from a non-resident entity fall under the definition of "Royalty" as per Section 9(1)(vi) of the Income Tax Act. This classification is based on the provision that payments for the use or right to use any industrial, commercial, or scientific equipment are considered royalties. The decision emphasized that the control and physical possession of the equipment (dredgers) by the assessee, to the exclusion of others, and the obligation to maintain the equipment in good working condition, did not constitute a provision of services but were corollary to the hiring of equipment itself. - ITAT concluded that the assessee was under an obligation to deduct tax at source as royalty payments.
TDS u/s 195 - payment for time charter higher charges are Royalty u/s 9(1)(vi) - The Tribunal held that the payments made by Jaisu Shipping Co. Pvt. Ltd. for hiring dredgers from a non-resident entity fall under the definition of "Royalty" as per Section 9(1)(vi) of the Income Tax Act. This classification is based on the provision that payments for the use or right to use any industrial, commercial, or scientific equipment are considered royalties. The decision emphasized that the control and physical possession of the equipment (dredgers) by the assessee, to the exclusion of others, and the obligation to maintain the equipment in good working condition, did not constitute a provision of services but were corollary to the hiring of equipment itself. - ITAT concluded that the assessee was under an obligation to deduct tax at source as royalty payments.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.