Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
TNMM functional comparability requires excluding rice manufacturers from a pure Basmati rice trader's benchmark and recognising operating export recei...
Working-capital adjustment subsumes delayed-receivable effects in TNMM benchmarking of captive software-development services, avoiding separate notion...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires exclusion of financially illogical super-profit comparables and correction of unsupported annual-report and ma...
Charitable character assessment preserves Section 80G approval despite inclusive spiritual teachings and incidental religious expenditure within the s...
Penalty proceedings for cash-loan acceptance require assessment proceedings and recorded Assessing Officer satisfaction; absent these, the proceedings...
Page of 4827
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
141 to 160 of 96536 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The note addresses whether interest received on an income-tax refund from India is taxable in India when earned by a non-resident, focusing on permanent establishment (PE) and treaty relief. Applying the principle that PE must be assessed in the year of receipt, the tribunal followed prior precedent and concluded the assessee had no PE in India and thus could claim DTAA treatment for interest; where the beneficial owner is a resident of the other contracting state the treaty caps source-state tax at 15% of gross interest. The tribunal noted alignment with earlier high court and apex court decisions in reaching this outcome.
The note addresses whether interest received on an income-tax refund from India is taxable in India when earned by a non-resident, focusing on permanent establishment (PE) and treaty relief. Applying the principle that PE must be assessed in the year of receipt, the tribunal followed prior precedent and concluded the assessee had no PE in India and thus could claim DTAA treatment for interest; where the beneficial owner is a resident of the other contracting state the treaty caps source-state tax at 15% of gross interest. The tribunal noted alignment with earlier high court and apex court decisions in reaching this outcome.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.