TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether the management support services received by the assessee were taxable as fees for technical services under the India-France tax treaty, including the effect of the most favoured nation clause and the make available condition. (ii) Whether the CIT(A) erred in admitting and relying upon additional material in violation of Rule 46A of the Income-tax Rules, 1962.
Issue (i): Whether the management support services received by the assessee were taxable as fees for technical services under the India-France tax treaty, including the effect of the most favoured nation clause and the make available condition.
Analysis: The treaty protocol was treated as an integral part of the tax treaty and capable of being read with the main DTAA provisions without a separate notification. On that basis, the restricted scope of fees for technical services under the India-UK treaty, including the make available condition, was applied through the most favoured nation clause in the India-France treaty. The services rendered by the assessee did not satisfy the make available requirement, and therefore the receipts could not be brought to tax as fees for technical services.
Conclusion: The issue was decided in favour of the assessee.
Issue (ii): Whether the CIT(A) erred in admitting and relying upon additional material in violation of Rule 46A of the Income-tax Rules, 1962.
Analysis: The material was called for by the CIT(A) in exercise of powers to make further inquiry for disposal of the appeal, and the findings were based on information gathered in that process. In such circumstances, the admission and consideration of the material did not amount to a Rule 46A infraction.
Conclusion: The issue was decided against the revenue.
Final Conclusion: The additions made by the Assessing Officer were not sustained, and the revenue's challenge to the appellate relief failed.
Ratio Decidendi: A treaty protocol forms part of the DTAA and can be applied without a separate notification where the treaty scheme and the incorporated MFN clause so require; further inquiry by the appellate authority under its statutory powers does not constitute a violation of the rule against fresh evidence.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
