Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
The ITAT held that the Appellant's remuneration for group services performed outside India does not arise in India and thus is not taxable in India under Article 12(5) of the India-Finland DTAA; consequently the Tribunal's prior reasoning in the Appellant's own appeals was affirmed. Separately, the Tribunal determined that guarantee fees charged by the Appellant are passive in nature and, akin to bank guarantee fees, constitute income from other sources rather than business profits, with no permanent establishment attributable; therefore, the Appellant's challenge to the assessment on this point failed. Ground No. 3 was dismissed and the Assessing Officer's order was confirmed.
The ITAT held that the Appellant's remuneration for group services performed outside India does not arise in India and thus is not taxable in India under Article 12(5) of the India-Finland DTAA; consequently the Tribunal's prior reasoning in the Appellant's own appeals was affirmed. Separately, the Tribunal determined that guarantee fees charged by the Appellant are passive in nature and, akin to bank guarantee fees, constitute income from other sources rather than business profits, with no permanent establishment attributable; therefore, the Appellant's challenge to the assessment on this point failed. Ground No. 3 was dismissed and the Assessing Officer's order was confirmed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
