https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121388 Article 5(3) of the India-South Korea DTAA governed the construction and installation projects as the specific rule, while Article 5(1) and 5(2) applied only as general permanent establishment provisions. The project work was completed within the treaty period, and the offshore fabrication and other overseas activities were performed outside India before installation. The Mumbai project office had restricted RBI permission and was limited to coordination and execution of approved contracts, so it was not shown to be a fixed place of business constituting a permanent establishment. As a result, the assessee had no permanent establishment in India for the relevant projects, and receipts from outside India operations were not taxable in India. en-us Fri, 29 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 13 Oct 2023 10:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121388 Article 5(3) of the India-South Korea DTAA governed the construction and installation projects as the specific rule, while Article 5(1) and 5(2) applied only as general permanent establishment provisions. The project work was completed within the treaty period, and the offshore fabrication and other overseas activities were performed outside India before installation. The Mumbai project office had restricted RBI permission and was limited to coordination and execution of approved contracts, so it was not shown to be a fixed place of business constituting a permanent establishment. As a result, the assessee had no permanent establishment in India for the relevant projects, and receipts from outside India operations were not taxable in India. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 29 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121388