Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
The HC held that the petitioner was providing export of services to its US parent company, not intermediary services. The petitioner assisted the parent in business consultancy by setting up meetings with experts/clients and providing advisory services. The payment terms showed the petitioner earned 8% markup, operating independently. Following Ernst & Young, since the recipient was outside India, the services qualified as export u/s 2(6) IGST Act. The HC set aside the orders treating it as intermediary service and directed processing of the refund claim as export of services filed within limitation.
The HC held that the petitioner was providing export of services to its US parent company, not intermediary services. The petitioner assisted the parent in business consultancy by setting up meetings with experts/clients and providing advisory services. The payment terms showed the petitioner earned 8% markup, operating independently. Following Ernst & Young, since the recipient was outside India, the services qualified as export u/s 2(6) IGST Act. The HC set aside the orders treating it as intermediary service and directed processing of the refund claim as export of services filed within limitation.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.