Income Tax : Tax on dividends, interest, royalties and FTS earned by non-residents is governed by the more beneficial rate under the Income-tax...
Income Tax : The applicable withholding tax depends on the Income-tax Act or the relevant DTAA, whichever is more beneficial. Treaty rates diff...
Income Tax : Section 194-IA requires buyers of immovable property to deduct TDS at 1% when the sale consideration or stamp duty value is ₹50 ...
Income Tax : When a resident buys unlisted shares from a non-resident, TDS must be deducted on gross consideration under Section 195, subject t...
Income Tax : Payments for sports sponsorship that grant global trademark usage can be split as royalty. Courts upheld withholding where tradema...
Income Tax : Direct & Indirect Taxes : Monthly Updates Date & Time – 3rd December 2022 (Time:11 a.m to 12:30 p.m) Tax Guru is Organiz...
Income Tax : Clarification on certain procedural and technical issues regarding the Income Disclosure Scheme, 2016 (IDS) under section 119 of t...
Income Tax : Finance Act, 2012 extended the obligation to withhold taxes to non- residents irrespective of whether the non-resident has -...
Income Tax : Government has recently modified the Foreign Exchange Management (Current Account Transactions) Rules, 2000 and the Liberalized Re...
Income Tax : The Supreme Court judgement on Vodafone tax case seems to have opened a Pandora's box with exporters too expressing reservation on...
Income Tax : Interest income earned by a foreign bank from foreign currency loans extended to Indian corporates was taxable on a gross basis. S...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held legal services are not FTS under Section 9(1)(vii) and directed partner-wise DTAA examination. FTS addition was de...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held that IT, salary and travel reimbursements without any profit element were not taxable and deleted the disallowance...
Income Tax : Delhi High Court held the ITAT failed to properly examine the ‘make available’ test for secondment payments, set aside its ord...
Income Tax : ITAT held no TDS was required as the Revenue failed to prove the services made technical knowledge available under the India-US DT...
Income Tax : CBDT notifies the Income-tax (Seventh Amendment) Rules, 2025, updating Forms 26Q and 27Q to include Section 194T on payments to fi...
Income Tax : it has been decided that no such request for Form 15E for certificates under section 195(2) & 195(7) for a particular Financial Ye...
Income Tax : CBDT vide notification No. 18/2021-Income Tax, Dated: March 16, 2021 inserted new rule 29BA. Application for grant of certificate ...
Income Tax : Clarification on orders dated 31.03.2020 and 03.04.2020 issued under section 119 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) by CBDT vid...
Income Tax : In case of pending applications for lower/nil rate of TDS/TCS for F.Y. 2019-20, the Assessing Officers have been directed to dispo...
ITAT Delhi held that DRP is a quasi-judicial authority and is required to issue directions on all the objections raised by assessee. Failure to adjudicate certain components results into violation of principles of natural justice. Accordingly, matter set aside to file of DRP.
The Tribunal held that reopening based solely on an NMS alert and without examining DTAA-exempt interest income violated Section 115A(5). The ruling confirms that non-residents cannot be reassessed when TDS-deducted income does not escape tax.
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)’s findings after noting the assessee produced no evidence to counter verified disallowances. Key takeaway: appellate relief requires substantiated rebuttal of factual verification.
ITAT Delhi condoned a delay of over 1,000 days in filing an appeal, holding that the Covid-19 period stands excluded under the Supreme Court’s suo motu extension of limitation, allowing the assessee’s appeal to proceed.
The ITAT Delhi held that reassessment under Section 147 was invalid where the AO failed to record any allegation of the assessee’s failure to disclose material facts. The ruling reaffirms that reopening beyond four years requires strict compliance with the proviso to Section 147.
The Bombay High Court quashed the AAR’s ruling that denied Mauritius DTAA benefits to Bid Services Division (Mauritius) Limited. The Court held that the petitioner was entitled to treaty protection on capital gains from the sale of MIAL shares. It ruled that legitimate corporate structures cannot be disregarded merely for resulting in tax advantages.
The Madras High Court held that recovery of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) shall remain stayed when the main income tax appeal involving related issues has been admitted by the court.
ITAT Mumbai ruled that relief under the first proviso to Section 201(1) is available if Form 26A certifying the deductee’s tax payment is furnished. As the buyer obtained the certificate post-appeal, the case was remanded for verification.
ITAT Delhi held that payments received by a US company for software licensing and support services cannot be treated as royalty or fees for technical services. Since the assessee had no permanent establishment in India, such income was classified as business profits and held non-taxable under the India-USA DTAA.
The Tribunal ruled that the cross-charged fee for use of third-party software does not qualify as Royalty as the payment is for a copyrighted article and not the transfer of copyright rights. This decision deletes a significant addition, reaffirming that the make available clause in the DTAA was not satisfied.
