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.
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: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    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
      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>Fees for Preliminary Studies by PLC Not Taxable under India-Denmark Double Taxation Agreement</h1> <h3>Christiani And Nielsen Copenhagan. Versus First Income-Tax Officer.</h3> Christiani And Nielsen Copenhagan. Versus First Income-Tax Officer. - ITD 039, 355, Issues Involved:1. Taxability of fees received by the assessee.2. Application of Article III of the Avoidance of Double Taxation Agreement (AADT) with Denmark.3. Interpretation of 'industrial and commercial profits' under Article III of AADT.4. Applicability of Article XIV of AADT to the fees received.5. Application of Section 9(1)(vii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.Summary:1. Taxability of Fees Received by the Assessee:The primary issue in this appeal is the taxability of Rs. 20,11,527 received by the assessee, a Public Limited Company registered in Denmark, for conducting preliminary studies, collecting data, and preparing a feasibility report for the Trans-Harbour Communication Link between Bombay and the Mainland. The Income-tax Officer (ITO) concluded that the fees were for technical services rendered in India and thus taxable under section 9(1)(vii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and Article XIV of the AADT with Denmark.2. Application of Article III of AADT:The ITO argued that Article III of AADT did not apply as the assessee had no permanent establishment in India. However, the Tribunal rejected this contention, stating that Article III provides exemption from taxability of profits in one territory if derived from a permanent establishment in the other territory. Since the assessee had no permanent establishment in India, Article III should apply, exempting the fees from tax.3. Interpretation of 'Industrial and Commercial Profits' under Article III of AADT:The Tribunal examined whether the fees for technical services could be considered 'industrial or commercial profits' under Article III. The term is not explicitly defined in AADT, but it excludes rents, royalties, interest, dividends, management charges, remuneration for labour or personal services. The Tribunal referred to the Special Bench decision in Siemens Aktiengesellschaft v. ITO, concluding that fees for technical services are part of industrial and commercial profits. The Tribunal noted that other treaties explicitly exclude fees for technical services from industrial and commercial profits, but AADT with Denmark does not.4. Applicability of Article XIV of AADT:The Tribunal considered whether the fees could be termed as profits or remuneration for labour or personal services under Article XIV. Article XIV applies to profits or remuneration derived by an individual. The Tribunal concluded that the term 'individual' refers to a living person, not an artificial entity like a company. Therefore, Article XIV does not apply to the assessee, a corporate entity.5. Application of Section 9(1)(vii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961:The Tribunal rejected the revenue's contention that section 9(1)(vii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, should apply in the absence of a specific provision in AADT for fees for technical services. The Tribunal emphasized that fees for technical services are part of industrial and commercial profits under AADT with Denmark and thus not taxable in India.Conclusion:The Tribunal concluded that the fees received by the assessee were in the nature of industrial and commercial profits. Since the assessee had no permanent establishment in India, the fees were not taxable in India under Article III of AADT with Denmark. The appeal was allowed.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found