https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205106 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, ruling in favor of the assessee. It held that the payment to Yahoo Holdings (Hong Kong) Ltd. constituted business income, not royalty, as it was for services and not the use of equipment. Since there was no Permanent Establishment in India, the payment was not taxable in India, and tax deduction at source was not necessary. The disallowance under section 40(a) was deleted, and the assessee prevailed in the case. en-us Fri, 24 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 14 Jul 2026 14:44:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205106 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, ruling in favor of the assessee. It held that the payment to Yahoo Holdings (Hong Kong) Ltd. constituted business income, not royalty, as it was for services and not the use of equipment. Since there was no Permanent Establishment in India, the payment was not taxable in India, and tax deduction at source was not necessary. The disallowance under section 40(a) was deleted, and the assessee prevailed in the case. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 24 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205106