Transfer pricing comparability requires functional alignment, reliable financial data, and careful review of working capital and receivables adjustmen...
Transfer pricing rules require benchmarking corporate guarantees and associated-enterprise advances, while invalid domestic-transaction adjustments ca...
Prospective sugar export prohibition required registered letters of credit; private contracts and export quotas created no enforceable continuation ri...
Retroactive interim-moratorium exclusion permits protective asset disclosure and preservation measures against personal guarantors pending arbitration...
The case involved the taxability of Fees for Technical Services (FTS) u/s India-Thailand DTAA. The Appellate Tribunal held that if revenue arises from "profits of an enterprise" u/r Article 7, Article 22 is inapplicable. The AO wrongly invoked Article 22 based on the web portal info, not the Memorandum of Association. FTS falls under business income unless proven otherwise. The existence of Permanent Establishment (PE) in India was wrongly assumed without proper examination. The services provided were technical, managerial, or consultancy, constituting FTS as part of business income, not falling u/s any DTAA article. The AO failed to establish why FTS is not part of business income, so Article 22 couldn't apply. Decision favored the assessee.
The case involved the taxability of Fees for Technical Services (FTS) u/s India-Thailand DTAA. The Appellate Tribunal held that if revenue arises from "profits of an enterprise" u/r Article 7, Article 22 is inapplicable. The AO wrongly invoked Article 22 based on the web portal info, not the Memorandum of Association. FTS falls under business income unless proven otherwise. The existence of Permanent Establishment (PE) in India was wrongly assumed without proper examination. The services provided were technical, managerial, or consultancy, constituting FTS as part of business income, not falling u/s any DTAA article. The AO failed to establish why FTS is not part of business income, so Article 22 couldn't apply. Decision favored the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4782
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
