Tuesday, 4 September 2012

S. 40(a)(i) disallowance cannot be made on basis of retrospective law

Channel Guide India Ltd vs. ACIT (ITAT Mumbai)

At the time the payments were made, the rentals for user of satellite were not chargeable to tax as "royalty" u/s 9(1)(vi) as per Asia Satellite 332 ITR 340 (Del) & B4U International and so there was no obligation of TDS. The retrospective amendment by FA 2012 cannot create an obkligation for TDS because the law cannot possibly compel a person to do something which is impossible to perform

No comments:

Mere execution of JDA with developer does not trigger capital gains tax in real estate transactions

  Recently Bangalore ITAT recently delivered an important ruling clarifying that merely executing a Joint Development Agreement (JDA) does n...