Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
Mutual fund maturity rules require proper rollover, redemption, disclosure, and due diligence; investor gains cannot excuse regulatory breaches or pen...
Dividend distribution tax paid on dividends distributed to non-resident shareholders was treated as falling within the more beneficial treaty rate under the India-Japan and India-Thailand DTAA, because the tax was viewed in substance as a tax on dividend income of the shareholder. Following binding precedent, the ITAT accepted the assessee's challenge to the higher domestic rate for AY 2017-18 and applied the same view to AY 2018-19. It also held that corporate club membership fees were allowable business expenditure under section 37 and not personal expenditure, as the membership served business purposes and the Revenue's authorities were distinguishable. Both appeals were allowed.
Dividend distribution tax paid on dividends distributed to non-resident shareholders was treated as falling within the more beneficial treaty rate under the India-Japan and India-Thailand DTAA, because the tax was viewed in substance as a tax on dividend income of the shareholder. Following binding precedent, the ITAT accepted the assessee's challenge to the higher domestic rate for AY 2017-18 and applied the same view to AY 2018-19. It also held that corporate club membership fees were allowable business expenditure under section 37 and not personal expenditure, as the membership served business purposes and the Revenue's authorities were distinguishable. Both appeals were allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.