S. 90: Double taxation relief – Non –resident – Assessee is not operating as independent entity-Assessee is not entitled to benefit of double taxation avoidance agreement between India and Mauritius.- Transaction was held to be liable to tax in India and tax to be with held – DTAA-India –Mauritius- USA [S. 195, Art. 13 ]
S. 90: Double taxation avoidance agreement -Income – Non –resident -Capital gains, arising from sale of shares in Indian Company to group company in Singapore is not Liable to tax in India —DTAA-India –Mauritius [S. 195, Art. 13 ]
S. 80P : Co-operative societies- Co –Operative Society is not a Credit Co-Operative Bank- Entitle deduction .[ S.80P(2)(a)(i) (4) ]
S. 80-O: Royalties – Foreign enterprises -Technical assistance- Principal agent relationship -Information concerning industrial, commercial or scientific knowledge, experience or skill- Major information sent by the appellant to the Sumitomo Corporation was in the form of blue prints for the manufacture of dies for stamping of doors which is not entitle to deduction .
S. 80M : Inter corporate dividends -Only the actual expenses for earning dividend income ought to be taken and not on estimate basis .
S. 80IC : Special category States – Undertaking job work by providing labour and factory space to manufacturers of medicines is entitle to deduction .
S. 80IB: Industrial undertakings – Employment of number of workers – Question of fact was examined by the Tribunal, finding of fact .
S.80IA:Industrial undertakings — Income from advertisements on foot over bridges and bus shelters is entitle to deduction .
S. 80IA :Industrial undertakings – Infrastructure development-
Ownership of undertaking is not Important — Successor in business can claim deduction-Suggestion to tax administration -Revenue to host on their web site a plain English version of the enactment [ 80IA)(4) ]
S.80IA: Industrial undertaking – Infrastructure facility – – Container freight station ( CFS) is eligible deduction as an infrastructure facility – Strictures passed against Dept’s Advocate for “most unreasonable attitude” of seeking to reargue settled concluded issues and not following the judicial discipline and law of precedents .