We are a family of strong 800+ people including 470+ professionals working from 14 locations across India.
We have a rich heritage and enduring legacy which are pivotal in shaping trust, excellence, and unparalleled legal expertise, thus building a strong reputation and a trusted brand.
We started in 1985 in a single room set up by the two founders with no prior experience of working in a law firm. Both the founders had outstanding academic records and focused on their deep understanding of the law to form the foundation of the firm.
Integrity, Knowledge and Passion are the principles that resonate with every member of our LKS family and the work that we do. These values drive us to build a community of legally sound professionals and well-serviced clients.
Everything we have accomplished over the last four decades is a result of our unique way of thinking which is deeply influenced by our core values and principles that define us.
We and our professionals consistently garner appreciation for the quality of our services and the depth of our legal expertise. This consistent acknowledgment serves as a testament to our unwavering commitment to exceed expectations.
Cross-border share sale - Eligibility for Tax Treaty benefit
By Harshit Khurana and Sonali Bansal
The article in this issue of Direct Tax Amicus seeks to examine the question as to whether treaty benefits should at all be provided if the non-resident seller of shares does not have much commercial substance. It in this regard observes that both as per General Anti Avoidance Rules (‘GAAR’) and the Principal Purpose Test introduced via MLI, treaty benefit should not be denied if the transaction has sound commercial rationale and providing such a benefit is in accordance with the object and purpose of the tax treaty. However, analysing how Courts in different countries have applied GAAR in tax treaty issues and what Courts in India have held applying judicial anti-avoidance test existing prior to the introduction of statutory GAAR, the authors opine that there is a lot of uncertainty surrounding the applicability of anti-abuse rules to cross border share acquisitions. According to them, while the fact of a SPV (with no other business) investing in an Indian company is not sufficient to hold that treaty benefit should be denied, it is also important to understand the object and purpose of the tax treaty. They suggest that the multi-national enterprises must ensure that there exists backup documentation to justify the commercial rationale for an arrangement.
Notifications & Circulars
Valuation of perquisites - Income Tax Rules amended
Life Insurance Policy - Rule notified for computation of income chargeable to tax for amount received under life insurance policy
No TDS under Section 194-I on payment of lease rent for lease of ship to an IFSC unit
Exchange rate for TDS on income payable in foreign currency to include payments to and from IFSC units
Search and seizure - Procedure for requisition services under Section 132(2) and for making a reference under Section 132(9D) for valuation, prescribed
Procedure for application under Section 155(20) prescribed
Applicability of Safe Harbour rules extended to AY 2023-24
Ratio decidendi
High Courts must formulate ‘substantial question of law’ before admitting appeal under Section 260A - Supreme Court
Provisional attachment of property under Benami Transactions Act during judicial custody of directors is valid - Madras High Court
Compensation for premature termination of contract is revenue expenditure - Bombay High Court
Non-compete fees is capital expenditure akin to intangible asset and is eligible for depreciation under Section 32(1)(ii) - Bombay High Court
Deemed dividend - Only registered shareholders of company as per Companies Act can be considered as shareholders of a company - Bombay High Court
