Cross-examination rights and corroborated evidence limit customs penalties for misdeclaration in genuine import transactions involving documented clea...
Tariff classification of vehicle gear components follows the specific gearing entry, displacing motor-vehicle parts classification and related liabili...
Necessary-party requirements limit impleadment of independent entities, while deferred consideration does not create an appealable adverse determinati...
Food supplement classification requires common parlance and authoritative tests, preventing treatment as proprietary Ayurvedic medicines without suppo...
Specified regulatory authority income receives conditional tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income character, and return f...
Tax exemption for regulatory authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-filing...
On the law applicable in September 2005, the offshore transfer of shares of a Mauritius company by non-resident shareholders was not taxable in India under section 9(1)(i), because the Tribunal applied the look-at test and followed Vodafone International Holdings to hold that an indirect transfer through a foreign company could not be treated as a direct transfer of Indian assets. Since the underlying gain was not chargeable to tax in India at the time of payment, section 195 did not create any withholding obligation, and later retrospective insertions in section 9(1)(i) could not fasten liability on the payer. The deletion of liability under sections 201(1) and 201(1A) was upheld.
On the law applicable in September 2005, the offshore transfer of shares of a Mauritius company by non-resident shareholders was not taxable in India under section 9(1)(i), because the Tribunal applied the look-at test and followed Vodafone International Holdings to hold that an indirect transfer through a foreign company could not be treated as a direct transfer of Indian assets. Since the underlying gain was not chargeable to tax in India at the time of payment, section 195 did not create any withholding obligation, and later retrospective insertions in section 9(1)(i) could not fasten liability on the payer. The deletion of liability under sections 201(1) and 201(1A) was upheld.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
