Income Tax : The framework outlines mandatory disclosures and timelines for opting into safe harbour. Key takeaway: strict compliance is essent...
Income Tax : The article explains how IRS audits are initiated and conducted to verify tax return accuracy. It highlights taxpayer duties, righ...
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 : The content outlines key filing deadlines and highlights penalties for non-compliance. The takeaway is that timely filing and paym...
Income Tax : Overview of US tax credits including refundable, nonrefundable, and partially refundable credits, with examples, forms used, and c...
Income Tax : CBDT issues clarification on Circular 01/2025, stating it applies only to the Principal Purpose Test in certain DTAAs and does not...
Corporate Law : Learn about CRS and FATCA, how India receives foreign account info, and the disclosure requirements for foreign assets and income ...
Income Tax : From April 2025, foreign taxes withheld must be included in total income for accurate reporting under section 198. Aims to prevent...
Income Tax : Explore challenges in TRC applications under DTAA by Indian companies. KSCAA proposes reforms for a simpler, efficient process. Le...
Income Tax : Appendix-I Declaration of no PE in India Declaration required u/s 9 of Income Tax Act, and for claiming relief under an agreement ...
Income Tax : The Tribunal ruled that a Dependent Agent PE arises only if agents habitually conclude contracts or secure orders on behalf of the...
Income Tax : The Karnataka High Court ruled that interconnect service charges paid to non-resident telecom operators do not constitute royalty....
Income Tax : The Bombay High Court quashed the AAR’s ruling that denied Mauritius DTAA benefits to Bid Services Division (Mauritius) Limited....
Income Tax : Tribunal held that cost-to-cost reimbursements for IT support services do not qualify as Fees for Included Services (FIS) under Ar...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi ruled that a valid Tax Residency Certificate (TRC) issued by Mauritius is sufficient proof of residency to claim benefi...
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 : Explore the Notification No. 33/2024 on the agreement between India and Spain for tax exchange. Understand its implications and ch...
Income Tax : Explore implications of Notification No. 21/2024 from Indias Ministry of Finance regarding the tax information exchange pact with ...
Income Tax : Notification No. 96/2023-Income Tax: Learn about the agreement between India and Saint Vincent for tax information exchange and as...
A new section 144C was inserted in the Income-tax Act, 1961 vide Finance (No. 2) Act of 2009. Section 144C provides for constitution of a Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) to decide cases of an eligible assessee as defined in sub-section (15) of section 144C of the Income-tax Act. The Dispute Resolution Panel Rules were notified vide SO No. 2958 (E) dated 20th November 2009.
Result of the Assessment Test held on Saturday 19th December 2009 for the Certificate Course on International Taxation in Mumbai (First Batch) and Hyderabad (Second Batch) – (19-01-2010) * Result – Mumbai (First Batch) * Result – Hyderabad (Second Batch)
The Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) has set up a committee to formulate rules for the safe harbour provisions—a set of rules that would enable the income tax (I-T) authorities to accept the transfer pricing returns without scrutiny. Transfer pricing refers to the price at which one arm of a company, usually a multinational corporation, transfer goods or services to another division of the same organisation in order to calculate each arm’s profit and loss separately.
The Supreme Court has stayed the Karnataka High Court ruling that asked technology firms to deduct tax on all payments made to non-residents on software purchases.A Bench headed by Justice S H Kapdia stayed the Karnataka High Court judgement on a couple of petitions by GE India Technology Centre Pvt Ltd and Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellance Pvt Ltd (EACEPL) seeking to set aside the high court judgement that held them legally bound to withhold tax on all cross-border payments.
An Indian company that provides a bank guarantee (BG) against a loan taken by a subsidiary abroad will now have to pay tax here for standing guarantee for its associate, irrespective of whether or not it has received a commission from the latter for the BG. Seven companies which have provided bank guarantees against loans taken by their subsidiaries abroad are already under the tax net of India’s transfer pricing administration, a senior income-tax official said.
We have considered the rival submissions carefully in the light of the relevant material on record as well as the decision cited by the parties. After careful perusal of various authorities relied on either side would show that they are quite distinguishable because none of the case law deals with the training expenses. In these cases some principles have been laid down. We further find that the decision relied on by the learned counsel for the assessee in the case of Ishikawajima- Harima Heavy industries Ltd. v. Director of Income-tax (supra) is not applicable because that decision
The applicant, a USA company, held shares in an Indian company. As part of a bankruptcy reorganization process, the shares in the Indian company together with other non-Indian assets & liabilities were transferred to other USA companies. The liabilities taken over were more than the assets. The agreement provided that the transfer of the shares was without consideration. The AAR had to consider (i) whether the liabilities of the transferor taken over by the transferee could be said to be “consideration” for transfer of the Indian shares so as to make it chargeable to capital gains and (ii) whether even if there was no chargeable ‘capital gains’, the applicant could be assessed on an ‘arms length” basis under the transfer pricing provisions.
The following officers are nominated as Members of the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) based on the recommendations of the DGIT (International Taxation), New Delhi:
The Finance Act, 2001 has introduced Sections 92 to 92F in the Income-Tax Act, 1961 with effect from Assessment Year 2002-2003 and these provisions are commonly referred to as transfer pricing regulations. These provisions deal with the methods of computation of income from international transactions, the document to be maintained by the enterprises, certification by a Chartered Accountant and penalty for noncompliance thereof. The legal, financial and accounting aspects relating to transfer pricing are highly complex having global ramifications.
In Asia Satellite 85 ITD 478 the Tribunal held that the said receipts were taxable as ‘royalty’ having been paid in respect of a “process”. However, in PanAmSat 9 SOT 100 it was held that as in the term “royalty” in Art. 12 of the India-USA DTAA there was a ‘comma’ after the words “secret formula or process”, it was only a ‘secret process’ which would qualify as royalty and not what was provided by the assessee. To resolve the conflict, the issue was referred to the Special Bench. HELD, reversing PanAmSat:
