Where assessee, a bank incorporated in Japan, paid salaries abroad to its expatriates working in Indian branch constituting PE, in view of fact that said expenditure had been incurred wholly and exclusively for Indian branch and, no part of those expenses could be allocated to any other branch by head office, provisions of section 44C did not apply to said expenditure and thus, assessee's claim for deduction of salary expenses was to be allowed.
Where PE of assessee received interest on deposits kept with HO, it was opined that once interest received by PE was deemed to be income of PE and there was no bar in India-Japan treaty on its taxability, then it could not be excluded from computation of income earned by PE.
MAT provisions are applicable only to domestic companies and not to foreign companies.
Where assessee-bank claimed that provisions of section 115JB were not applicable to its case, in view of provisions of section 90(2), assessee's claim for lower impostion of tax in terms of article 7(3) of India-Japan DTAA had to be accepted because provisions of section 115JB are subordinate to section 90(2) and have no overriding effect on said section.
Where PE of assessee received interest on deposits kept with HO, it was opined that once interest received by PE was deemed to be income of PE and there was no bar in India-Japan treaty on its taxability, then it could not be excluded from computation of income earned by PE.
MAT provisions are applicable only to domestic companies and not to foreign companies.
Where assessee-bank claimed that provisions of section 115JB were not applicable to its case, in view of provisions of section 90(2), assessee's claim for lower impostion of tax in terms of article 7(3) of India-Japan DTAA had to be accepted because provisions of section 115JB are subordinate to section 90(2) and have no overriding effect on said section.
No comments:
Post a Comment