Educational approval requires mandatory State registration, but incidental surplus and trustee-owned land do not prove private benefit or profit motiv...
Judicial review of settlement orders cannot reopen settled customs notices, while statutory interest remains subject to verification and quantificatio...
Customs Broker licence lending for consideration justified revocation where exporter authorisation and client verification obligations were also breac...
Fraudulent import documents suspend limitation protection, while redemption of confiscated goods requires duty and interest despite bona fide purchase...
ODR arbitration participation remains mandatory after failed conciliation, while jurisdictional and maintainability objections stay available before t...
Transparency in technical bid evaluation requires disclosed standards and recorded reasons; opaque scoring invalidated tender awards and required fres...
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.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4813 
Join Channel 
