Stay abreast with the latest developments in the professional domain along with in-depth analysis through the monthly BCA Journal. Get access to an engaging library of researched publications from the BCAS stable.
Learn MoreLorem Ipsum has been the industry's standard dummy text ever since the 1500s, when an unknown printer took a galley of type and scrambled it to make a type specimen book.
Learn MoreLorem Ipsum has been the industry's standard dummy text ever since the 1500s, when an unknown printer took a galley of type and scrambled it to make a type specimen book.
Learn MoreA voluntary organisation established on 6th July 1949, BCAS has presently more than 9,000 members from all over the country. BCAS is a principle-centered and learning-oriented organisation promoting quality service and excellence in the profession of Chartered Accountancy.
Learn MoreLorem Ipsum has been the industry's standard dummy text ever since the 1500s, when an unknown printer took a galley of type and scrambled it to make a type specimen book.
Learn MoreLorem Ipsum has been the industry's standard dummy text ever since the 1500s, when an unknown printer took a galley of type and scrambled it to make a type specimen book.
Learn More
Anusha Investments Ltd. vs. ITO; 378 ITR 621 (Mad):
The assessee had purchased shares from a non-resident company which had resulted in capital loss to the nonresident company. Therefore, the assessee had not deducted tax at source. The Tribunal held that whether or not the non-resident company suffered a loss or gain on the sale of shares, a duty was cast on the assessee to deduct the tax whenever it made payment to the nonresident and that the assessee was not only liable to deduct the tax at source, but it also had to pay the tax so collected to the exchequer.
In appeal by the assessee, the Madras High Court reversed the decision of the Tribunal and held as under:
“In the present transaction, admittedly, there was no liability to tax. As a result, the question of deducting tax at source and the assessee violating the provisions of section 195 did not arise and, therefore, the assessee could not be treated as an assessee in default.”