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...
Marker testing and double haploid services were examined under Article 12(4) of the India-Netherlands DTAA to determine if receipts constituted royalty. Since the services did not merely generate reports but converted seeds into double haploid plants and supplied enhanced seeds for commercial exploitation, the process involved technology and scientific experience whose information was passed on to the Indian affiliate, satisfying the treaty's royalty definition; the challenge to royalty characterization was rejected. Separately, amounts recovered on a cost-to-cost basis for routine third-party IT support were treated as reimbursements, and no technical knowledge or process was "made available"; the receipts were held not taxable as FTS under section 9(1)(vii). - ITAT
Marker testing and double haploid services were examined under Article 12(4) of the India-Netherlands DTAA to determine if receipts constituted royalty. Since the services did not merely generate reports but converted seeds into double haploid plants and supplied enhanced seeds for commercial exploitation, the process involved technology and scientific experience whose information was passed on to the Indian affiliate, satisfying the treaty's royalty definition; the challenge to royalty characterization was rejected. Separately, amounts recovered on a cost-to-cost basis for routine third-party IT support were treated as reimbursements, and no technical knowledge or process was "made available"; the receipts were held not taxable as FTS under section 9(1)(vii). - ITAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.