Income Tax : Form 41 is now compulsory for non-residents claiming DTAA benefits, replacing Form 10F. The update mandates online filing and ensu...
Income Tax : The Court held that indirect share transfers deriving value from Indian assets are taxable. Treaty benefits were denied due to tax...
Income Tax : Income Tax Department Ministry of Finance, Government of India DTAA & FTC Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) & For...
Income Tax : The case explains the statutory framework governing appeals and revisions under the Income-tax Act. It highlights the role of face...
Income Tax : The article explains how ESOP taxation spans salary, capital gains, DTAA, and disclosure requirements. It highlights that errors i...
Income Tax : India and France have signed a protocol granting full taxing rights on capital gains from share sales to the country of company re...
Income Tax : CBDT issues clarification on Circular 01/2025, stating it applies only to the Principal Purpose Test in certain DTAAs and does not...
Income Tax : Explore challenges in TRC applications under DTAA by Indian companies. KSCAA proposes reforms for a simpler, efficient process. Le...
Income Tax : Explore the details of India's Double Tax Treaty with Cyprus, its signing date, benefits for both nations, tax recovery provisions...
Income Tax : Need for early amendment of DTAA regulations to stop the double taxation of Indian IT firms: Ms. Anupriya Patel tells the visiting...
Income Tax : The Delhi ITAT held that belated filing of Form No. 67 is only a procedural lapse and cannot extinguish substantive Foreign Tax Cr...
Income Tax : The Supreme Court affirmed that payments for cloud computing services are not royalty where no intellectual property rights are tr...
Income Tax : The Tribunal set aside the dismissal of a delayed appeal, holding that the issue of distribution fee taxability requires fresh exa...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that consultancy payments for architectural services were not FTS since no technical knowledge was made availabl...
Income Tax : The tribunal held that gains from sale of shares did not fall under Article 14(4). It ruled that Article 14(6) applies, making gai...
Income Tax : The government enforced a tax collection assistance agreement with Japan effective from 8 July 2025. The notification enables cros...
Income Tax : The amendment expands the definition of permanent establishment to include service-based activities exceeding 183 days. It clarifi...
Income Tax : The Finance Ministry notifies the India-Belgium protocol amending the 1993 tax treaty, effective June 26, 2025, updating definitio...
Income Tax : Notification implements the India-Qatar Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) and Protocol, effective from the next fiscal ye...
Income Tax : Circular No. 01/2025 outlines the application of the Principal Purpose Test (PPT) under India's Double Taxation Avoidance Agreemen...
Mumbai Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (Mumbai ITAT) [2010-TII-154-ITAT-MUM-INTL] in a batch of cases, with the lead case being that of Reliance Industries Ltd. (Taxpayer), on the issue of whether consideration paid to a US resident (US entity) for licensing of computer software would be in the nature of ‘royalty’, either under the provisions of the Indian Tax Laws (ITL) or under the India-US Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA). The Mumbai ITAT, after considering the various clauses of the license agreement (Agreement), the Indian Copyright Act, 1957 (ICA) and other decisions, including that of the Special Bench of the Delhi ITAT (SB) in the case of Motorola Inc. 95 ITD 91 held that the payment was for the purchase of a copyrighted article and not the copyright itself. Furthermore, the Mumbai ITAT stated that the definition of ‘royalty’ under the DTAA is more restrictive than what is provided in the ITL and that it is incorrect to hold that computer software on a media continues to be an intellectual property right. Therefore, the payment made for the purchase of software cannot be termed as ‘royalty’.
Recently, the Mumbai bench of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal) in the case of ADIT v. Solid Works Corporation [2010-TII-130-ITAT-MUM-INTL] Judgment date 1 April 2010, Assessment Year 2005-06) held that payment received by the taxpayer for sale of shrink wrapped software is not in the nature of royalty within the meaning of Article 12(3) of the India-USA tax treaty (tax treaty).
Article 26(3) of the India-USA DTAA protects the interest of non residents vis-a-vis residents. Article 26(3) provides that payment made to a non-resident will be deductible under the same conditions as if the payment were made to a resident. The exceptions provided in Article 26(3) are not applicable on facts. As per s. 40(a)(i), no disallowance can be made in respect of payments to residents on the ground of non-deduction of tax at source. Therefore, in view of Article 26(3), no disallowance can be made even in case of payments to non-residents even if the amount is found taxable in India in their hands. Herbal Life International 101 ITD 450 (Del) followed.
India and Norway are all set to expand the scope of their double taxation avoidance agreement (DTAA) to facilitate greater information exchange on potential cases of tax evasion. After changes to the Indo-Swiss tax treaty this would be the second suc
Though the damages included an element of interest, the same is not assessable because in a decree or arbitration award, the amount loses its original character and assumes the character of a judgment debt. In substance, interest partake the character of the compensation and is not assessable as interest. Islamic Investment 265 ITR 254 (Bom) followed.
Challenge in this batch of appeals filed by the revenue under Section 35(L)(b) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (for short “the Act”) is to the orders passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, South Zone (for short “the Tribunal”), inter alia, holding that the duty of Central Excise on shrimps and shrimp seeds produced and removed by the respondent (hereinafter referred to as “the assessee”), a 100% Export Oriented Unit (for short “EOU”), in the Domestic Tariff Area (for short “DTA”) without the approval of the Development Commissioner, would be payable under Section 3(1) of the Act and not under the proviso appended thereto.
Income-tax Appellate Tribunal , in the case of DDIT v. Nederlandsche Overzee Baggermaatschappiji BV. has analysed whether the lease of a dredger would be considered a bare boat charter or a wet lease. After analysis of the facts of the case, it held that the lease was a bare boat lease, and that a dry lease of equipment does not result in a permanent establishment.
In a recent case of SET Satellite Singapore Pte Ltd.1 the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai (“ITAT”) has held that royalty payments made by a resident of Singapore to another Singaporean entity, as consideration of rights to transmit and broadcast matches etc. in India, are not subject to Indian withholding tax requirements. The ITAT in this case relied on Article 12(7) of the India-Singapore Tax Treaty (“Treaty”), which provides that royalty payments will be considered to arise in India, only if the royalty is paid by a resident of India or incurred in connection with its permanent establishment (“PE”) in India and such royalty is borne by such PE.
Union Finance Minister, Shri Pranab Mukherjee made a statement in both the Houses of Parliament i.e., Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha today on the Protocol signed between India and Switzerland yesterday to amend the existing Agreement and Protocol for Avoidance of Double Taxation with respect to Taxes on Income. Text of the statement is given below:
In such cases 100% of the goods are cleared from the EOU to depot from where the sale is effected through consignment agents. CBEC has earlier issued Circular No 268/85-CX.8 dated 29. 09.1994, clarifying that valuation of goods in such situations will have to be done in accordance with the Rule 8 of the Customs Valuation Rule (Determination of Price of Imported Goods), 1988 as it existed then.
