The issue was whether telecom and O&M service receipts are taxable as royalty/FTS in India. The tribunal held they are business profits and not taxable without a PE, granting relief.
The Court ruled that limitation under Section 54 cannot bar refund of mistakenly paid GST. It held that excess tax collected without authority violates Article 265 and must be returned.
Learn the key technical and operational hurdles in TDS/TCS compliance, including FVU errors and defaults. The article highlights practical solutions for error-free filing.
The new tax regime shifts loan approval to verified financial data like ITR and GST. Clean records now determine eligibility instead of physical assets.
The tribunal examined whether depreciation can be claimed on concession rights under a BOT/DBFOT project. It held that the right to receive annuity/toll is an intangible asset eligible for depreciation under tax law.
The adjudicating authority imposed penalties after finding incomplete filing of PAS-3 details. The ruling confirms that such violations attract general penalty under Section 450 when no specific penalty exists.
The case examined whether Section 42 was violated in a private placement. The authority ruled there was no substantive breach and replaced the penalty with a nominal fine for a procedural lapse.
The case addressed delayed filing of return of allotment under Section 42(9). The authority reduced the penalty after recognizing a government circular that excluded part of the delay period.
The authority found non-compliance with Section 42(6) due to absence of a separate bank account. It held that such violation attracts penalty under Section 42(10).
Omission of required attachments in annual return filing resulted in penalties under Section 450. The decision stresses the importance of accurate and complete filings.
