Transfer-pricing aggregation of distinct support-service and subcontract transactions was rejected, while debt-free receivables attracted no notional ...
Customs exemptions cover photovoltaic assembly machinery and PVF backsheets, while fully declared cleared imports may avoid confiscation and penalties...
Specific tariff classification for LCD devices overrides treatment as electricity-meter parts, defeating differential duty, extended limitation, and p...
Stayed disciplinary punishment does not establish unfitness for insolvency professional registration; reconsideration must disregard mere pendency of ...
Indirect corporate control can create related-party status, excluding financial creditors from Committee of Creditors representation, participation an...
Scientific research association approval requires continuing SIRO status, annual donation reporting, and donor certificates for the approved foundatio...
Scientific research institution approval is conditional on SIRO recognition, annual donation reporting, donor certification, and prescribed compliance...
Page of 4878
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
41 to 60 of 97553 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The case involved the taxability of Fees for Technical Services (FTS) u/s India-Thailand DTAA. The Appellate Tribunal held that if revenue arises from "profits of an enterprise" u/r Article 7, Article 22 is inapplicable. The AO wrongly invoked Article 22 based on the web portal info, not the Memorandum of Association. FTS falls under business income unless proven otherwise. The existence of Permanent Establishment (PE) in India was wrongly assumed without proper examination. The services provided were technical, managerial, or consultancy, constituting FTS as part of business income, not falling u/s any DTAA article. The AO failed to establish why FTS is not part of business income, so Article 22 couldn't apply. Decision favored the assessee.
The case involved the taxability of Fees for Technical Services (FTS) u/s India-Thailand DTAA. The Appellate Tribunal held that if revenue arises from "profits of an enterprise" u/r Article 7, Article 22 is inapplicable. The AO wrongly invoked Article 22 based on the web portal info, not the Memorandum of Association. FTS falls under business income unless proven otherwise. The existence of Permanent Establishment (PE) in India was wrongly assumed without proper examination. The services provided were technical, managerial, or consultancy, constituting FTS as part of business income, not falling u/s any DTAA article. The AO failed to establish why FTS is not part of business income, so Article 22 couldn't apply. Decision favored the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4878 
