NPCI-based bank account validation for IEC applications and modifications enables real-time validation; incorrect details block submission or trigger ...
Creation/Invocation of pledge of securities through depository system: standardized pledge forms, notice requirement and invocation notifications to p...
Calendar Spread margin benefit for Single Stock Derivatives suspended on expiry day for expiring contracts; exchanges must implement systems and rule ...
Proportionate interest, unexplained credits and partner remuneration disputed; proofs of fund nexus and lender identity were decisive and disallowance...
Capital gains valuation from stamp assessment versus net consideration for residential reinvestment: deemed stamp value replaced for gains but not for...
Whether a portion of consideration paid under a global partnership agreement for on-ground advertising and the right to use event-related marks constituted "royalty" under s.195 read with the Indo-Singapore DTAA was determined by construing the agreement as creating a substantive licence to use the relevant trademark worldwide across "advertising material" in any medium. The payer's own admissions and contemporaneous correspondence showed trademark use could not be treated as merely incidental to advertising. Since the apportionment of the composite consideration into advertising (2/3) and trademark licence (1/3) was not substantially disputed, treating 1/3 as royalty and requiring withholding tax at 15% on that portion was upheld. - HC
Whether a portion of consideration paid under a global partnership agreement for on-ground advertising and the right to use event-related marks constituted "royalty" under s.195 read with the Indo-Singapore DTAA was determined by construing the agreement as creating a substantive licence to use the relevant trademark worldwide across "advertising material" in any medium. The payer's own admissions and contemporaneous correspondence showed trademark use could not be treated as merely incidental to advertising. Since the apportionment of the composite consideration into advertising (2/3) and trademark licence (1/3) was not substantially disputed, treating 1/3 as royalty and requiring withholding tax at 15% on that portion was upheld. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.