Just a moment...
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%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether referral commission paid to a non-resident foreign concern for introducing clients, in respect of services rendered outside India, was taxable in India so as to require deduction of tax at source under section 195 and attract disallowance under section 40(a)(i).
Analysis: The referral fee was paid outside India to a foreign concern for services performed abroad. It was not received in India, could not be treated as deemed receipt in India, and did not accrue or arise in India. On the facts, the payment did not fall within section 9(1)(i) because no part of the operations was carried out in India and no income was attributable to operations in India. It also did not fall within section 9(1)(v), section 9(1)(vi), or section 9(1)(vii), as the payment was neither interest, royalty, nor fees for technical services. The services consisted only of referring or introducing customers and did not amount to managerial, technical, or consultancy services. Therefore, the deeming provision in section 9(2) had no application. Independently, under the India-USA DTAA, the payment was not fees for included services because no technical knowledge, skill, or know-how was made available, and it constituted business profits taxable only in the absence of a permanent establishment in India.
Conclusion: No tax was deductible at source on the referral commission, and the disallowance under section 40(a)(i) was not sustainable.