Authentication of paper assessment orders upheld, while qualifying repairs, consumables and vendor advance write-offs remain deductible business claim...
Transaction value cannot be rejected solely on non-statutory valuation guidelines without corroborative evidence supporting reassessment of final cust...
Cross-examination rights and corroborated evidence limit customs penalties for misdeclaration in genuine import transactions involving documented clea...
Page of 4782
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
301 to 320 of 95636 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The Appellate Tribunal addressed the issue of Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) under section 195, specifically disallowance under section 40(a)(i) for payments labeled as 'Royalty' under section 9(1)(vi). The AO disallowed payments to VBSNI equating them to previous payments to MCI Communication Service, treated as 'Royalty'. However, the Tribunal ruled that VBSNI payments did not qualify as 'Royalty' under DTAA, thus no TDS was required. The Tribunal's decision, upheld by the High Court, directed deletion of the disallowance. The appeal by the revenue was dismissed.
The Appellate Tribunal addressed the issue of Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) under section 195, specifically disallowance under section 40(a)(i) for payments labeled as 'Royalty' under section 9(1)(vi). The AO disallowed payments to VBSNI equating them to previous payments to MCI Communication Service, treated as 'Royalty'. However, the Tribunal ruled that VBSNI payments did not qualify as 'Royalty' under DTAA, thus no TDS was required. The Tribunal's decision, upheld by the High Court, directed deletion of the disallowance. The appeal by the revenue was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.