Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
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...
Page of 4786
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
461 to 480 of 95715 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The ITAT Chennai held that the sales commission received by a non-resident company in India, a resident of the USA, cannot be classified as 'fee for included services' u/s 9(1) of the Act. The company's role was limited to liaising with customers and communicating their requirements to another entity responsible for project execution. The amalgamation details were incorrectly noted by the DRP and AO. The commission received was for sales made to customers in the USA, and the company's activities did not fall within the definition of 'fee for included services' u/s 12(4) of the Indo-USA DTAA. Therefore, the commission should be treated as sales commission and not taxable in India. The addition was deleted, and the appeal of the assessee was allowed.
The ITAT Chennai held that the sales commission received by a non-resident company in India, a resident of the USA, cannot be classified as 'fee for included services' u/s 9(1) of the Act. The company's role was limited to liaising with customers and communicating their requirements to another entity responsible for project execution. The amalgamation details were incorrectly noted by the DRP and AO. The commission received was for sales made to customers in the USA, and the company's activities did not fall within the definition of 'fee for included services' u/s 12(4) of the Indo-USA DTAA. Therefore, the commission should be treated as sales commission and not taxable in India. The addition was deleted, and the appeal of the assessee was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4786
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
