Independent manufacturing undertaking eligibility preserves Section 80IA/80IB deductions, while machinery kept ready for use qualifies for depreciatio...
Assessing Officer Satisfaction Requirement Bars Penalty for Cash Receipt in Immovable-Property Sale Cases Where Initiation Lacks Recorded Satisfaction...
Self-assessed import entries remain appealable, while bona fide classification disputes without misdeclaration cannot justify confiscation or penaltie...
Page of 4894
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
641 to 660 of 97867 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 4894 
