Specialized Investment Fund distribution now requires dedicated certification, while transitional recognition preserves existing qualified distributor...
Overlapping GST proceedings require Central and State authorities to designate one competent authority for coordinated adjudication of the same matter...
Composite healthcare supplies retain exemption when patient care is the contract's essential character, despite payment through an implementing agency...
Receipt of immovable property requires actual possession or enjoyment; redevelopment allotments exchanged for tenancy rights fall outside deemed incom...
Page of 4823
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1381 to 1400 of 96456 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
TDS u/s 195 - payments made to its Non-Resident Telecom Operators (NTOs) for provision of bandwidth capacity and provision of interconnect services - The Tribunal referred to previous proceedings involving the payer (the domestic entity making the payments), where it was initially held that the payments constituted Royalty/FTS and were taxable under section 9 of the Act. However, this decision was later overturned by the jurisdictional High Court, which ruled that the payments were not Royalty/FTS. Relying on the High Court's judgment, the Tribunal concluded that the payments could not be taxed in the hands of the assessee under section 9 of the Act or the relevant DTAA. Therefore, the CIT(A)’s decision to allow the appeal of the assessee was upheld.
TDS u/s 195 - payments made to its Non-Resident Telecom Operators (NTOs) for provision of bandwidth capacity and provision of interconnect services - The Tribunal referred to previous proceedings involving the payer (the domestic entity making the payments), where it was initially held that the payments constituted Royalty/FTS and were taxable under section 9 of the Act. However, this decision was later overturned by the jurisdictional High Court, which ruled that the payments were not Royalty/FTS. Relying on the High Court's judgment, the Tribunal concluded that the payments could not be taxed in the hands of the assessee under section 9 of the Act or the relevant DTAA. Therefore, the CIT(A)’s decision to allow the appeal of the assessee was upheld.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.