Proportionality in company penalty quantification requires aggravating and mitigating factors; mechanical multiplication of director liability is impe...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3261 to 3280 of 96177 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.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
