<?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>2007 (5) TMI 261 - ITAT DELHI-C</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64359</link>
    <description>Expatriate remuneration paid by a non-resident employer was treated as exempt under article 14(2) of the India-France treaty because the employees were in India for less than 183 days and there was no actual deduction of their salary in computing the profits of the permanent establishment. A presumptive computation under section 44BB could not be used to create a deemed deduction, since a legal fiction cannot be extended beyond its limited purpose. The treaty required actual deduction, and the treaty position prevailed over the domestic deeming provision, so the assessee was not treated as an assessee in default for the covered remuneration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 11 Jul 2012 12:22:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=102800" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (5) TMI 261 - ITAT DELHI-C</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64359</link>
      <description>Expatriate remuneration paid by a non-resident employer was treated as exempt under article 14(2) of the India-France treaty because the employees were in India for less than 183 days and there was no actual deduction of their salary in computing the profits of the permanent establishment. A presumptive computation under section 44BB could not be used to create a deemed deduction, since a legal fiction cannot be extended beyond its limited purpose. The treaty required actual deduction, and the treaty position prevailed over the domestic deeming provision, so the assessee was not treated as an assessee in default for the covered remuneration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64359</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>