Retrospective cancellation of charitable registration under section 12AB(4) was unsustainable; related-party benefit allegations did not prove nongenu...
Merger control notice and disclosure rules: Supreme Court limits penalties, rejects reopening of approved combination, and sets aside adverse findings...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2701 to 2720 of 96100 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Voice termination service receipts were held not to be royalty or fees for technical services under the Act or the India-USA DTAA because the payment was for a standard telecom service, with no transfer of a right in equipment, intellectual property, or any secret process. The Tribunal followed prior coordinate bench and HC rulings, and held that retrospective domestic amendments broadening "process" could not enlarge the treaty definition of royalty through Article 3(2). The receipts were therefore business profits, and in the absence of a permanent establishment in India, they were not taxable in India.
Voice termination service receipts were held not to be royalty or fees for technical services under the Act or the India-USA DTAA because the payment was for a standard telecom service, with no transfer of a right in equipment, intellectual property, or any secret process. The Tribunal followed prior coordinate bench and HC rulings, and held that retrospective domestic amendments broadening "process" could not enlarge the treaty definition of royalty through Article 3(2). The receipts were therefore business profits, and in the absence of a permanent establishment in India, they were not taxable in India.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.