35. The intention behind enacting provisions of section 2(22)(e) are that closely held companies (i.e. companies in which public are not substantially interested), which are controlled by a group of members, even though the company has accumulated profits would not distribute such profit as dividend because if so distributed the dividend income would became taxable in the hands of the shareholders.
However, the mere fact that the agreement was not an agency agreement is not a decisive factor as to the taxability of the amount received on termination of the agreement. Even if the agreement was not an agency agreement and it was a simple contract, the amount received on termination of the Contract can still be taxed as a revenue receipt. Merely because it does not come
This contention, in our opinion, has to be rejected outright. It is pertinent to note that Section 44DA was inserted in the Statute book by the Finance Act, 2003 w.e.f. lsl April, 2004. Simultaneously, the provisions of Section 44D were also amended by the same Finance Act. According to the amended provisions, Section 44D is applicable for computing the income by way of royalty or fees for technical services
7.1 As per the provision of section 10A of the Act, assessee is entitled to claim the deduction in respect of the profits and gains as derived by the assessee’s undertaking from the export of the articles of the things for the period of the 10 consecutive A.Y’s. Sub-section (2) to sec. 10A has laid down certain conditions for the eligibility of the undertaking to claim the deduction
34. For the purpose of taxation the authorities under the Act have proceeded on the basis that the fees received by the Appellant was for the entire Indian Project as such chargeable to tax. 35. Two basic questions which, thus, arise for our consideration are :
6.15 As noted earlier, there was a judicial opinion that on distribution or division or allotment of assets to partners by the firm on dissolution or otherwise there resulted no gain exigible to tax, however, by incorporating Section 45(3) and 45(4), the legislature has declared its intention in clear terms that partners and the firm are two independent entities not only for the purposes of assessment but also for the purpose of determining the charge of income tax
CIT Vs. Arthusa Offshore Company (Uttarakhand)- ITAT has erred in law in holding that word ‘tax’ does not include “surcharge” for the purposes of Clause (2) of Article 14 of the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement with USA, and in upholding the decision of the CIT(Appeals), reducing the tax rate applicable to assessee NRC at 60 per cent instead of 65 per cent applied by the AO
A short question which arises for determination in this Special Leave Petition is: whether the High Court was entitled to condone the delay of 16 days in filing the Reference Application by the Commissioner under Section 35H(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944?
As rightly pointed out by Shri Pardiwalla, even a promise to render services at a future date would entitle the assessee for deduction u/s 80-O in view of the specific wordings in the section.
The very purpose of entering into agreements between the two foreigners is to acquire the controlling interest which one foreign company held in the Indian company, by other foreign company. This being the dominant purpose of the transaction, the transaction would certainly be subject to municipal laws of India, including the Indian Income Tax Act.
