Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
HC held that cross-charges paid by affiliated entities do not constitute Fees for Technical Services (FTS) or Fees for Included Services (FIS) under India-US DTAA. The services rendered did not transfer technical knowledge or enable recipient's absorption of specialized skills. Without copyright transfer or substantive knowledge transfer, the payments cannot be construed as royalties. Relying on Supreme Court precedent, the HC directed the Assessing Officer to issue a 'NIL' withholding tax certificate for cross-cost charges, setting aside the original order that sought to impose 15% withholding tax.
HC held that cross-charges paid by affiliated entities do not constitute Fees for Technical Services (FTS) or Fees for Included Services (FIS) under India-US DTAA. The services rendered did not transfer technical knowledge or enable recipient's absorption of specialized skills. Without copyright transfer or substantive knowledge transfer, the payments cannot be construed as royalties. Relying on Supreme Court precedent, the HC directed the Assessing Officer to issue a 'NIL' withholding tax certificate for cross-cost charges, setting aside the original order that sought to impose 15% withholding tax.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
