Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
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.