Judicial review of settlement orders cannot reopen settled customs notices, while statutory interest remains subject to verification and quantificatio...
Customs Broker licence lending for consideration justified revocation where exporter authorisation and client verification obligations were also breac...
Fraudulent import documents suspend limitation protection, while redemption of confiscated goods requires duty and interest despite bona fide purchase...
ODR arbitration participation remains mandatory after failed conciliation, while jurisdictional and maintainability objections stay available before t...
Transparency in technical bid evaluation requires disclosed standards and recorded reasons; opaque scoring invalidated tender awards and required fres...
Automated export obligation extensions remove separate regional applications after committee approval for Advance Authorisation and EPCG authorisation...
International cargo transhipment through Indian ports continues with Customs-controlled storage, re-export safeguards, and coordinated multi-station m...
The ITAT followed its co-ordinate Bench rulings in the assessee's own earlier years on materially identical facts and found no change in law or evidence to justify a different view. It held that the presence of related entities in India and the support services they rendered did not create a fixed place, service or dependent agent PE, or a business connection, so reinsurance and retrocession receipts were not taxable in India as business profits under the treaty. It also held that the support service receipts failed the make-available test because no technical knowledge, skill, know-how or process was transferred for independent future use, and the amounts were therefore not taxable as fees for technical services. The impugned additions were deleted.
The ITAT followed its co-ordinate Bench rulings in the assessee's own earlier years on materially identical facts and found no change in law or evidence to justify a different view. It held that the presence of related entities in India and the support services they rendered did not create a fixed place, service or dependent agent PE, or a business connection, so reinsurance and retrocession receipts were not taxable in India as business profits under the treaty. It also held that the support service receipts failed the make-available test because no technical knowledge, skill, know-how or process was transferred for independent future use, and the amounts were therefore not taxable as fees for technical services. The impugned additions were deleted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
