Join our free webinar on July 7 at 5 PM for insights into 10 recent High Court income tax judgments favoring assessees. Expert analysis by CA Dipak Dama.
GoDaddy India Web Services Private Limited (hereinafter also referred to as applicant) proposes to enter into a ‘Services Agreement’ with GoDaddy.com, LLC (hereinafter also referred to as ‘GoDaddy US’) located in Arizona, USA and incorporated in Delaware, USA. GoDaddy US is a domain name registrar
Marketing and promotion services: Applicant proposes to engage in promotion and marketing of GoDaddy US services in India. This would essentially include increasing the awareness of services provided by GoDaddy US and establishment of the brand GoDaddy in India.
It is observed that in this case, provider of service i.e. the applicant, is located in India, which is the taxable territory; recipient i.e. GoDaddy US is located in USA; the service to be provided by the applicant i.e. business support services is not specified under Section 66 D i.e. Negative List Services;
The question is very simple and clear as to whether the sale of the books to the Indian entities involves any ‘service’ and would attract the service tax liability. The answer is clearly in negative. It is therefore, hold that this service does not entail and invite any liability for service tax.
Comparative analysis of Definitions under Companies Act, 2013 and The Companies (Amendment) Bill, 2016. Corporate Affairs Minister Mr. Arun Jaitley on 17th March, 2016 introduced in the Lok Sabha The Companies (Amendment) Bill, 2016 to amend the Companies Act (i.e. the principal Act) in order to remove the difficulties faced by stakeholders.
A credit score lets lenders know whether or not you are a responsible borrower. While most people think they know everything they need to know about credit scores, majority have been blinded by the rampant misconceptions surrounding the calculation of the scores. There are a number of things that your credit bureau and creditors may […]
Maharashtra Sales Tax Department is making substantial changes in its automation processes relating to taxpayer interface, w.e.f F.Y 2016-17. This is expected to result into significantly more efficiency in the working of the Department, less errors due to minimum human intervention and maximum benefits in relation to time management.
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
| 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 |
| 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 |
| 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 |
| 29 | 30 | 31 | ||||
