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 ...
Mutual fund maturity rules require proper rollover, redemption, disclosure, and due diligence; investor gains cannot excuse regulatory breaches or pen...
Threshold exemption excludes exempt services, while stamp-paper purchases avoid reverse charge; consequential service tax penalties were also set asid...
ITAT held that amounts received by a non-resident corporate assessee (Belgian tax resident) from two Indian group entities do not constitute fees for technical services (FTS) under Article 12(3)(b) of the India-Belgium DTAA or s.9(1)(vii) of the Act on the facts before it. The Tribunal found the services were not managerial, technical or consultancy in character; where some tasks might prima facie meet technical or consultancy tests, the Department failed to discharge the onus by adducing cogent evidence. The Functional Services Agreement and prior non-classification of receipts supported the assessee. The ITAT reversed the Departmental treatment of the receipts as FTS (and rejected inconsistent royalty/FTS characterisation).
ITAT held that amounts received by a non-resident corporate assessee (Belgian tax resident) from two Indian group entities do not constitute fees for technical services (FTS) under Article 12(3)(b) of the India-Belgium DTAA or s.9(1)(vii) of the Act on the facts before it. The Tribunal found the services were not managerial, technical or consultancy in character; where some tasks might prima facie meet technical or consultancy tests, the Department failed to discharge the onus by adducing cogent evidence. The Functional Services Agreement and prior non-classification of receipts supported the assessee. The ITAT reversed the Departmental treatment of the receipts as FTS (and rejected inconsistent royalty/FTS characterisation).
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.