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...
The Delhi High Court examined whether guarantee charges received by an appellant from its Indian subsidiaries are taxable in India. The Tribunal found that the appellant's payments did not fall under Article 12 of the DTAA as it was not a party to loan agreements with foreign banks. The guarantee charges were deemed as remuneration for providing parent company guarantees, not interest. The income accrued in India as per the Intra Group Agreement terms. The charges were linked to services provided in India for the benefit of subsidiaries. The Court held that the guarantee fees did not qualify as interest u/s Article 12 of the DTAA. The Court ruled against the appellant, stating that the guarantee charges do not fall under the definition of interest. The issue of whether the charges constitute business income u/s Article 7 of the DTAA was left open for future consideration.
The Delhi High Court examined whether guarantee charges received by an appellant from its Indian subsidiaries are taxable in India. The Tribunal found that the appellant's payments did not fall under Article 12 of the DTAA as it was not a party to loan agreements with foreign banks. The guarantee charges were deemed as remuneration for providing parent company guarantees, not interest. The income accrued in India as per the Intra Group Agreement terms. The charges were linked to services provided in India for the benefit of subsidiaries. The Court held that the guarantee fees did not qualify as interest u/s Article 12 of the DTAA. The Court ruled against the appellant, stating that the guarantee charges do not fall under the definition of interest. The issue of whether the charges constitute business income u/s Article 7 of the DTAA was left open for future consideration.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.