Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Page of 4819
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
781 to 800 of 96365 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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 4819 
Join Channel 
