Religious purpose exclusion versus charitable purpose: non overriding religious objects do not attract Explanation 3, registration directed under sect...
Search-assessment proviso jurisdiction, time-barred valuation reports, and denial of cross-examination vitiate valuation-based and confession-based ad...
Proceeds of crime: provisional attachment confirmed; equivalent value attachment and acquisition date fair market value upheld, Covid exclusion preser...
On a plain reading of Section 115-O, the Court recorded a prima facie view that dividend distribution tax is an additional income-tax on the domestic company in respect of distributed profits, not a tax paid on behalf of shareholders. That understanding was treated as consistent with earlier Bombay High Court authority and the Supreme Court's decision in Godrej & Boyce, while the contrary view in Colorcon Asia that DDT is tax on the shareholder's dividend income, attracting DTAA benefit, created a direct conflict between coordinate Benches. Because the issue involved a clear cleavage of opinion on the nature of DDT and treaty entitlement, the appeals were not decided on merits and were referred to a Larger Bench.
On a plain reading of Section 115-O, the Court recorded a prima facie view that dividend distribution tax is an additional income-tax on the domestic company in respect of distributed profits, not a tax paid on behalf of shareholders. That understanding was treated as consistent with earlier Bombay High Court authority and the Supreme Court's decision in Godrej & Boyce, while the contrary view in Colorcon Asia that DDT is tax on the shareholder's dividend income, attracting DTAA benefit, created a direct conflict between coordinate Benches. Because the issue involved a clear cleavage of opinion on the nature of DDT and treaty entitlement, the appeals were not decided on merits and were referred to a Larger Bench.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
