The central issue was whether a "virtual service permanent...

The central issue was whether a "virtual service permanent establishment" exists under Article 5(2)(k)/5(6) of the DTAA where no personnel are physically present in India. Relying on treaty-construction principles and Clifford Chance, the court held the DTAA must be strictly construed; Article 5's phrase "within a Contracting State" carries territorial connotation and contemplates physical presence of employees/personnel. Consequently, a virtual service PE not expressly provided by the DTAA or domestic law cannot be recognised, the Revenue's finding was rejected, the impugned NIL-withholding certificate and order were set aside and the matter remanded to the AO for fresh decision within two weeks - HC