In the case of Barefoot Noomadi Hotel v MIRA, the TAT's decision is that commission payments made to Online Travel Agencies (“OTAs”) operating under the Merchant Model are not subject to Withholding Tax (“WHT”) under Section 6 of the BPT Act.

In the case of Moosa Naseer v Maldives Inland Revenue Authority (MIRA), the Supreme Court, on 22 June 2020, passed judgment in favour of Moosa Naseer in a case that, inter alia challenged the MIRA's power to initiate legal proceedings for the recovery of unpaid land rent and fines pursuant to an agreement between the Ministry of Fisheries, Agriculture and Marine Resources (‘MoFAMR’) and Moosa Naseer.

Summary On what basis should capital allowance be claimed for assets held at the commencement of the BPT Act? In the case of ADK Enterprises v MIRA1, the Tax Appeal Tribunal (“TAT”), by unanimous decision, has held that companies must claim capital…

Summary Sale of assets or a business combination? Is acquisition of leasehold rights eligible for capital allowance? In the case of Traders Hotel v MIRA1, the Tax Appeal Tribunal (“TAT”), by unanimous decision, upheld the decision of the MIRA…