Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
TNMM functional comparability requires excluding rice manufacturers from a pure Basmati rice trader's benchmark and recognising operating export recei...
Working-capital adjustment subsumes delayed-receivable effects in TNMM benchmarking of captive software-development services, avoiding separate notion...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires exclusion of financially illogical super-profit comparables and correction of unsupported annual-report and ma...
Charitable character assessment preserves Section 80G approval despite inclusive spiritual teachings and incidental religious expenditure within the s...
Penalty proceedings for cash-loan acceptance require assessment proceedings and recorded Assessing Officer satisfaction; absent these, the proceedings...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision rejecting the assessee's claim for refund of excess DDT paid under section 115-O, holding that the rate prescribed therein applies irrespective of the DTAA provisions. The Tribunal relied on the Special Bench ruling in Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd., which clarified that DDT is a tax on the domestic company paying dividends, not on the non-resident shareholder, and thus DTAA protections do not apply to reduce the DDT rate. The ITAT noted that the issue of DDT rates under DTAA versus section 115-O is pending before the Delhi High Court but, until a ruling is made, the Special Bench decision is binding. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the CIT(A)'s order sustaining the higher DDT liability was affirmed.
The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision rejecting the assessee's claim for refund of excess DDT paid under section 115-O, holding that the rate prescribed therein applies irrespective of the DTAA provisions. The Tribunal relied on the Special Bench ruling in Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd., which clarified that DDT is a tax on the domestic company paying dividends, not on the non-resident shareholder, and thus DTAA protections do not apply to reduce the DDT rate. The ITAT noted that the issue of DDT rates under DTAA versus section 115-O is pending before the Delhi High Court but, until a ruling is made, the Special Bench decision is binding. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the CIT(A)'s order sustaining the higher DDT liability was affirmed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.