<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2007 (5) TMI 267 - ITAT DELHI-I</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=65567</link>
    <description>Residence of a foreign company under section 6(3)(ii) turns on whether control and management of its affairs is situated wholly in India. On the facts, incorporation in Singapore, board meetings there, maintained banking and statutory records, and a Singapore tax residency certificate showed effective control outside India, while Indian shareholding and investments were insufficient to prove central control in India; the company was therefore treated as non-resident. That finding removed the for the section 68 cash-credit addition, which was not sustainable. The write-off of unquoted investment was, however, sustained because the underlying investment income was not taxable in India on the facts found.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 31 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 10 Feb 2024 12:35:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=104005" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (5) TMI 267 - ITAT DELHI-I</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=65567</link>
      <description>Residence of a foreign company under section 6(3)(ii) turns on whether control and management of its affairs is situated wholly in India. On the facts, incorporation in Singapore, board meetings there, maintained banking and statutory records, and a Singapore tax residency certificate showed effective control outside India, while Indian shareholding and investments were insufficient to prove central control in India; the company was therefore treated as non-resident. That finding removed the for the section 68 cash-credit addition, which was not sustainable. The write-off of unquoted investment was, however, sustained because the underlying investment income was not taxable in India on the facts found.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 31 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=65567</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>