<?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>2012 (10) TMI 473 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217535</link>
    <description>A revisional order under section 263 was analysed in the context of payments to a non-resident for market development services. The key question was whether the payment was taxable in India as fees for technical services; the discussion noted the domestic exclusion where services are used for business carried on outside India, and the treaty requirement that technical knowledge or skill be made available was not satisfied. On those facts, no taxable income in India was shown, so the basic condition for invoking section 263, namely an order that is both erroneous and prejudicial to the Revenue, was not established. The revisional order was therefore unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 11 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Oct 2012 15:20:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=190910" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (10) TMI 473 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217535</link>
      <description>A revisional order under section 263 was analysed in the context of payments to a non-resident for market development services. The key question was whether the payment was taxable in India as fees for technical services; the discussion noted the domestic exclusion where services are used for business carried on outside India, and the treaty requirement that technical knowledge or skill be made available was not satisfied. On those facts, no taxable income in India was shown, so the basic condition for invoking section 263, namely an order that is both erroneous and prejudicial to the Revenue, was not established. The revisional order was therefore unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217535</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>