Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
The High Court examined whether payments made by an Indian company to its associated entity in the US for supply of computer software constituted "royalty" under the Income Tax Act and the India-US DTAA. The court held that the tax authority failed to consider the assessee's submissions that such payments did not constitute royalty, merely relying on a draft assessment order which is not a final determination. Citing precedents, the court ruled that for payments to qualify as royalty, there must be a transfer of copyright enabling acts under the Copyright Act. Mere right to use software without any proprietary rights does not amount to royalty. The court quashed the orders denying nil withholding certificates and directed fresh examination.
The High Court examined whether payments made by an Indian company to its associated entity in the US for supply of computer software constituted "royalty" under the Income Tax Act and the India-US DTAA. The court held that the tax authority failed to consider the assessee's submissions that such payments did not constitute royalty, merely relying on a draft assessment order which is not a final determination. Citing precedents, the court ruled that for payments to qualify as royalty, there must be a transfer of copyright enabling acts under the Copyright Act. Mere right to use software without any proprietary rights does not amount to royalty. The court quashed the orders denying nil withholding certificates and directed fresh examination.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
