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...
ITAT held that payments received by the taxpayer from its Indian affiliate and a third-party advisor do not constitute "royalty" under Article 13(2) of the India-UK DTAA and, accordingly, are not taxable in India under section 9(1)(vi). The Tribunal further determined there is no dependent agent permanent establishment (DAPE) in India: the Assessing Officer failed to discharge the burden of proving the Article 5(4) conditions (authority to conclude contracts, maintenance of stock, habitual order securing on behalf of the taxpayer), and the transfer-pricing finding that intercompany transactions were at arm's length remained uncontroverted. Prior ITAT decisions for earlier years were followed in favor of the taxpayer.
ITAT held that payments received by the taxpayer from its Indian affiliate and a third-party advisor do not constitute "royalty" under Article 13(2) of the India-UK DTAA and, accordingly, are not taxable in India under section 9(1)(vi). The Tribunal further determined there is no dependent agent permanent establishment (DAPE) in India: the Assessing Officer failed to discharge the burden of proving the Article 5(4) conditions (authority to conclude contracts, maintenance of stock, habitual order securing on behalf of the taxpayer), and the transfer-pricing finding that intercompany transactions were at arm's length remained uncontroverted. Prior ITAT decisions for earlier years were followed in favor of the taxpayer.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
