<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1994 (11) TMI 171 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=62554</link>
    <description>Under the India-Japan tax treaty, a remittance under a collaboration agreement was treated as an advance or business receipt, not as royalty or fees for technical services, because the operative conditions for the agreement were not fulfilled and no documents or services were actually provided. The treaty&#039;s permanent establishment test also was not met, since no construction, erection or assembly activity had commenced in India. On that basis, the receipt was not taxable in India as business profits under the treaty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 29 Nov 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Jan 2011 13:42:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=101000" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (11) TMI 171 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=62554</link>
      <description>Under the India-Japan tax treaty, a remittance under a collaboration agreement was treated as an advance or business receipt, not as royalty or fees for technical services, because the operative conditions for the agreement were not fulfilled and no documents or services were actually provided. The treaty&#039;s permanent establishment test also was not met, since no construction, erection or assembly activity had commenced in India. On that basis, the receipt was not taxable in India as business profits under the treaty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 29 Nov 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=62554</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>