Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>US Company's Legal Fees Not Taxable under India-USA Treaty; Australian University's Receipts Taxable</h1> <h3>ONGC as representative assessee of Dewey And LeBoeuf International Company LLC, USA And ONGC as representative assessee of University of New South Wales, Australia Versus DCIT (International Taxation) Circle-II, Dehradun</h3> The Tribunal allowed the appeals, ruling that the legal services provided by Dewey & LeBoeuf International Company LLC, USA, were not taxable as 'fees ... Income accrued in India - professional legal services provided before a foreign court- FIS under Article 12 of the India-USA DTAA - assessee claimed to be taxable u/s 44BB - AO brought the receipts of the non-resident to tax as FTS u/s 115A - HELD THAT:- Assessee provided of professional legal services before a foreign court, which cannot be brought to tax as FIS under Article 12 of the India-USA DTAA, because there is no make available of any particular knowledge or skill to ONGC before the courts which can enable ONGC to represent its case in future. Under Section 9(1)(vii) legal services cannot be treated as FTS as it is a professional services which is outside the scope of Section 9(1)(vii) of the Act. In A.Y. 2009-10, the Tribunal held that the said legal services is not taxable as FTS u/s 9(1)(vii) of the Act. Therefore, appeal of the assessee is allowed. Payments received by University of New South Wales, Australia - payment for a contract with ONGC for construction, installation and maintenance of High Resolution CT Scanner at ONGC premises - HELD THAT:- In this year also the payments received by University of New South Wales, Australia during the relevant previous year were that annual maintenance charges for maintenances of the High Resolution CT Scanner. Since High Resolution CT Scanner is directly associate and inextricably connected with the extraction and production of mineral oil, the receipts would fall within the ambit of consideration for any mining or like project which is excluded from the definition of term FTS as defined in Explanation 2 to Section 9(1)(vii) of the Act and same would be taxable u/s 44BB . Thus the receipts by the said non-resident would fall within the ambit of Section 44BB as held in the earlier Assessment Years as well. - Decided in favour of assessee. Issues Involved:1. Taxability of receipts as 'fees for technical services' under Section 115A of the Income-tax Act, 1961.2. Applicability of the India-USA Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) on the receipts.3. Taxability of receipts under Section 44DA vs. Section 44BB of the Income-tax Act, 1961.4. Application of deemed profit rate for computing taxable income under Section 44DA.5. Charging of surcharge and education cess on tax payable under the India-Australia DTAA.Detailed Analysis:Issue 1: Taxability of Receipts as 'Fees for Technical Services'The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) upheld the Assessing Officer's decision that the receipts of Dewey & LeBoeuf International Company LLC, USA, were taxable as 'fees for technical services' under Section 115A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal noted that the facts for the assessment year 2012-13 were identical to those for the assessment year 2011-12. The Tribunal held that the legal services provided by Dewey & LeBoeuf were professional services and not 'fees for technical services' as defined under Section 9(1)(vii) of the Act, thereby exempting them from tax.Issue 2: Applicability of India-USA DTAAThe Tribunal referred to the India-USA DTAA, particularly Article 12, which requires that for services to be taxable as 'fees for included services,' they must 'make available' technical knowledge, experience, or skill to the recipient. The Tribunal held that the legal services rendered by Dewey & LeBoeuf did not 'make available' any such knowledge or skill to ONGC, thus not falling under the purview of Article 12 of the DTAA.Issue 3: Taxability Under Section 44DA vs. Section 44BBFor the University of New South Wales, Australia, the Tribunal examined whether the receipts for the construction, installation, and maintenance of a High Resolution CT Scanner were taxable under Section 44DA or Section 44BB. The Tribunal concluded that since the services were directly associated with the extraction and production of mineral oil, they fell within the scope of Section 44BB, which pertains to mining or like projects, and not Section 44DA.Issue 4: Deemed Profit Rate Under Section 44DAThe Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) had applied a deemed profit rate of 25% for computing taxable income under Section 44DA. The Tribunal, however, found that the receipts were more appropriately taxable under Section 44BB, which does not necessitate the application of a deemed profit rate as under Section 44DA.Issue 5: Surcharge and Education CessThe Assessing Officer had applied a surcharge and education cess on the tax payable, computed as per the maximum rate prescribed in the India-Australia DTAA. The Tribunal found that since the receipts were taxable under Section 44BB, the surcharge and education cess should not be applied as they were for technical services under Section 44DA.Conclusion:The Tribunal allowed the appeals, holding that:1. The legal services provided by Dewey & LeBoeuf International Company LLC, USA, were not taxable as 'fees for technical services' under Section 115A and Article 12 of the India-USA DTAA.2. The receipts of the University of New South Wales, Australia, for the maintenance of the High Resolution CT Scanner were taxable under Section 44BB, not Section 44DA.3. The surcharge and education cess applied by the Assessing Officer were not applicable as the receipts were taxable under Section 44BB.Result:Both appeals of the respective assessees were allowed, and the orders of the CIT(A) were overturned. The Tribunal's decision was pronounced in the Open Court on 12th June 2019.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found