印度最高法院对雀巢案的裁决与静态解释--分析

K. Prakash
{"title":"印度最高法院对雀巢案的裁决与静态解释--分析","authors":"K. Prakash","doi":"10.59403/vgsjxz","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article takes a look at the recent ruling of the Supreme Court of India in Assessing Officer v. Nestle SA (Nestle) which deliberated the right to invoke the most favoured nation (MFN) clause in a tax treaty and whether such an MFN clause is automatically invoked once notified or if a further notification is required. The article provides an overview of the Nestle case and the fresh arguments put forth by the taxpayer in the petition challenging the decision and critically analyses the two issues deliberated.","PeriodicalId":517533,"journal":{"name":"Asia-Pacific Tax Bulletin","volume":"22 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Indian Supreme Court’s Ruling in Nestle and the Static Interpretation – An Analysis\",\"authors\":\"K. Prakash\",\"doi\":\"10.59403/vgsjxz\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article takes a look at the recent ruling of the Supreme Court of India in Assessing Officer v. Nestle SA (Nestle) which deliberated the right to invoke the most favoured nation (MFN) clause in a tax treaty and whether such an MFN clause is automatically invoked once notified or if a further notification is required. The article provides an overview of the Nestle case and the fresh arguments put forth by the taxpayer in the petition challenging the decision and critically analyses the two issues deliberated.\",\"PeriodicalId\":517533,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asia-Pacific Tax Bulletin\",\"volume\":\"22 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Asia-Pacific Tax Bulletin\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.59403/vgsjxz\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asia-Pacific Tax Bulletin","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.59403/vgsjxz","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文探讨了印度最高法院最近在 Assessing Officer 诉 Nestle SA(雀巢公司)一案中的裁决,该裁决审议了援引税收协定中最惠国条款的权利,以及最惠国条款是否在通知后自动援引,还是需要进一步通知。文章概述了雀巢案和纳税人在质疑裁决的请愿书中提出的新论点,并对审议的两个问题进行了批判性分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Indian Supreme Court’s Ruling in Nestle and the Static Interpretation – An Analysis
This article takes a look at the recent ruling of the Supreme Court of India in Assessing Officer v. Nestle SA (Nestle) which deliberated the right to invoke the most favoured nation (MFN) clause in a tax treaty and whether such an MFN clause is automatically invoked once notified or if a further notification is required. The article provides an overview of the Nestle case and the fresh arguments put forth by the taxpayer in the petition challenging the decision and critically analyses the two issues deliberated.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Indian Supreme Court’s Ruling in Nestle and the Static Interpretation – An Analysis Effects of the Global Minimum Tax on Income Tax Incentive Framework in Indonesia Tax Treaty Implementation in the Maldives: A Double Standard in Practice Tax Aspects of Mergers and Acquisitions in Bangladesh Insurance of Tax Risks: The Current State of Play in Asia
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1