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。
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
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信