Search and seizure: abatement of earlier search bars use of prior seized material in later search-based assessments; relief limited to new documents f...
Admission of additional evidence under remand rules must await a meaningful remand report; failure to do so breaches natural justice and mandates rema...
Export Obligation Discharge Certificates for EPCG compliance cannot be questioned by Customs unless DGFT adjudicates and cancels them, so demands quas...
Page of 4821
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
6761 to 6780 of 96408 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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.