| First | Prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | Next | Last |
| Documents Found: 294 |
| Title |
Forum |
Year |
Symantec Software Solutions (P) Ltd. vs ACIT
bad- debts-bad- debts and ALP-The assessee wrote off excess commission charged from an AE as bad- debt. It was irrelavant when ALP was determined whether actual price charged for s [LexDoc Id : 411025]
|
ITAT (Mumbai) |
2011 |
Orbitech Ltd. vs JCIT
[LexDoc Id : 410908]
|
ITAT (Mumbai) |
2011 |
ACIT vs Leaap International (P) Ltd.
[LexDoc Id : 430393]
|
ITAT (Chennai) |
2011 |
ITO vs Tianjin Tianshi India (P) Ltd.
[LexDoc Id : 418500]
|
ITAT (Delhi) |
2011 |
Deere and Co., In re
Capital Gains - Exemption-Transfer without consideration, Arm's lenght price.-The applicant was acompany of USA. It transferred sgares held by it of its 100% subsidary in India, to group company company of Singapore without cons [LexDoc Id : 411782]
|
AAR |
2011 |
Verizon Data Services India (P) Ltd., In re
Fees for technical services v. reimbursement of salary of expatriate employees-Service provided by GTE-OC are in the nature of managerial services-The applicant was an Indian company. It reimbursed salary and expenses to a US company for deputing non-resident employees. Those expatriate employees [LexDoc Id : 410517]
|
AAR |
2011 |
Capgemini India (P) Ltd. vs Addl. CIT
[LexDoc Id : 412440]
|
ITAT (Mumbai) |
2011 |
Siva Industries and Holdings Ltd. vs ACIT
[LexDoc Id : 411906]
|
ITAT (Chennai) |
2011 |
DHL Lemur Logistics (P) Ltd. vs DCIT
[LexDoc Id : 411512]
|
ITAT (Mumbai) |
2011 |
Fab India Overseas (P) Ltd. vs CIT
[LexDoc Id : 439756]
|
HC (Delhi) |
2011 |
Fab India Overseas (P) Ltd. vs CIT
Erroneous order v. Cryptic order-Necessary information obtained-The A.O. had obtained the necessary information after making due enquiries. He did apply his mind. There was no lack of enquiry. The A.O. did not give [LexDoc Id : 414959]
|
HC (Delhi) |
2011 |
CIT vs Quark Systems India (P) Ltd.
Computation of: ALP-Selection of comparables / Remand by Tribunal-Ay-2004-2005. The assessee, a subsidiary of a Swiss company, entered into transactions with its parent company. It chose ‘DTL’ as comparable for purpo [LexDoc Id : 412041]
|
HC (Punjab and Haryana) |
2011 |
OHM Ltd., In re
Income from - Exploration etc. of mineral oil-Seisimic data processing contract, Demobilisation & mobilisation charges-The applicant was a company of U. K. It earned income from sesimic data acquisition and processing contract. Its income was taxable under s.44B(1) and [LexDoc Id : 409758]
|
AAR |
2011 |
Lanka Hydraulic Institute Ltd., In re
Royalty-Transfer of Know-how with perpetual license and support, Non-transferrable, non-exclusive right to use software-The Kolkatta port trust awarded dredging contract to WAPCOS. It sub-contracted work to LIH of Srilanka. The work involved model studies to develop riv [LexDoc Id : 409756]
|
AAR |
2011 |
Bergen Oilfield Services AS, In re
Non-resident, Buisness of exploration nof oil etc.-Mobilisation and demobilisation charges-The entire charges received were taxable under s.44BB at the presumptive rate, unless it opts to be assessed under s.44BB(3)
Ss.44BB(1) and 44BB( [LexDoc Id : 409753]
|
AAR |
2011 |
R.R. Donnelley India Outsource (P) Ltd., In re
Fees for technical services-Data processing services-The applicant was the Indian company. It made payment to a company from U. K. for data processing services. The services included routine data entry, [LexDoc Id : 409567]
|
AAR |
2011 |
ITO vs Abu Dhabi Commercial Bank
[LexDoc Id : 472843]
|
ITAT (Mumbai) |
2011 |
Standard Chartered Bank and Atos Origin IT Services Singapore (P) Ltd. vs DDIT
Fees for technical services or royalty-Right to use equipment- Absence of control over equipment, data processing charges v. use of process-A.Y.2006-2007. The assesee made payment to an account of data processing charges. The payment was not made for use of any process. It was non-payment [LexDoc Id : 409780]
|
ITAT (Mumbai) |
2011 |
Citicorp Investment Bank (Singapore) Ltd. vs DDIT
Capital gains-Gains on: Cancellation of Forward Contracts in foreign exchange-A.Y. 1998-99, 2005-06.
The assessee a bank of Singapore was registered as FII in India. It took loan in foreign currency to invest in debentures. [LexDoc Id : 434736]
|
ITAT (Mumbai) |
2011 |
ACIT vs Global Vantedge (P) Ltd.
[LexDoc Id : 410589]
|
ITAT (Delhi) |
2011 |
ACIT vs Clough Engg. Ltd.
[LexDoc Id : 409254]
|
ITAT (Delhi) |
2011 |
Sapient Corpn. (P) Ltd. vs DCIT
[LexDoc Id : 409253]
|
ITAT (Delhi) |
2011 |
Larsen and Toubro Ltd. and Anr. vs UOI and Ors.
[LexDoc Id : 409038]
|
SC |
2011 |
ITO vs Mahavirchand Mehta
[LexDoc Id : 410591]
|
ITAT (Mumbai) |
2011 |
UOI vs Ashok J. Ramsinghani
Appeal to high court: Condonation of delay-Appeal filed under s.35 of FEMA, Condonation of delay not to be beyond 60 days as per s.35, Delay of 291 days in filing appeal not condonable-Show cause notice was issued to the respondent within the period of two years from the commencement of Foreign Exchange Management Act 1999. The respo [LexDoc Id : 409047]
|
HC (Bombay) |
2011 |
| |
| First | Prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | Next | Last |
| |
