<?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>2009 (12) TMI 586 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203314</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the payments made to the foreign companies constituted royalty under the Special Bench decision. However, the issue was remitted back to the Assessing Officer to consider the applicability of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) provisions, potentially providing relief from the tax deduction at source requirement. The Revenue&#039;s appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, while the assessee&#039;s appeal was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Dec 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 06 Jun 2013 10:14:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=176876" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (12) TMI 586 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203314</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the payments made to the foreign companies constituted royalty under the Special Bench decision. However, the issue was remitted back to the Assessing Officer to consider the applicability of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) provisions, potentially providing relief from the tax deduction at source requirement. The Revenue&#039;s appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, while the assessee&#039;s appeal was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Dec 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203314</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>