https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151839 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the Commissioner's order under section 263. It held that the payment to M/s. Mott Ewbank Preece (MEP) was not taxable as "fees for technical services" under the India-UK DTAA. Additionally, the "no objection certificate" issued by the Assessing Officer was deemed not prejudicial to the Revenue's interests. The Tribunal found that MEP's services did not meet the criteria for technical services under the DTAA, leading to the restoration of the original order with a 5 percent tax deduction requirement. en-us Wed, 23 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 17 Jun 2013 18:22:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151839 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the Commissioner's order under section 263. It held that the payment to M/s. Mott Ewbank Preece (MEP) was not taxable as "fees for technical services" under the India-UK DTAA. Additionally, the "no objection certificate" issued by the Assessing Officer was deemed not prejudicial to the Revenue's interests. The Tribunal found that MEP's services did not meet the criteria for technical services under the DTAA, leading to the restoration of the original order with a 5 percent tax deduction requirement. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 23 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151839