Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
721 to 740 of 96333 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Explanations 4 to 6 to section 9(1)(vi) were held to expand the definition of royalty and to operate prospectively from 01.04.2012, following the Supreme Court ruling in Engineering Analysis and the assessee's earlier case. On that basis, remittance for IPLC and related bandwidth services to a non-resident was not taxable as royalty for the years in question, so no obligation to deduct tax at source under section 195 arose. Consequently, disallowance under section 40(a)(i) and consequential action under section 201, including interest liability, could not be sustained. The Court also noted that the law does not require an impossible act, and the questions of law were answered for the assessee.
Explanations 4 to 6 to section 9(1)(vi) were held to expand the definition of royalty and to operate prospectively from 01.04.2012, following the Supreme Court ruling in Engineering Analysis and the assessee's earlier case. On that basis, remittance for IPLC and related bandwidth services to a non-resident was not taxable as royalty for the years in question, so no obligation to deduct tax at source under section 195 arose. Consequently, disallowance under section 40(a)(i) and consequential action under section 201, including interest liability, could not be sustained. The Court also noted that the law does not require an impossible act, and the questions of law were answered for the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.