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 in favour of the appellant that amounts received for rendering IT support and non-IT services are not taxable as Fee for Technical Services/Fee for Included Services under the Act or the India-UK DTAA for purposes of TDS u/s 195. The Tribunal affirmed the DRP's factual finding that "IT support" and "IT development" services were dissimilar and found no reliable evidence that technical knowledge, skill or know-how was made available to the associated enterprise in India or that the assessee enabled the AE to perform the services independently. Consequently the additions treating receipts as FTS/FIS were deleted and both grounds of appeal were allowed.
ITAT held in favour of the appellant that amounts received for rendering IT support and non-IT services are not taxable as Fee for Technical Services/Fee for Included Services under the Act or the India-UK DTAA for purposes of TDS u/s 195. The Tribunal affirmed the DRP's factual finding that "IT support" and "IT development" services were dissimilar and found no reliable evidence that technical knowledge, skill or know-how was made available to the associated enterprise in India or that the assessee enabled the AE to perform the services independently. Consequently the additions treating receipts as FTS/FIS were deleted and both grounds of appeal were allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
