https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244836 Supervisory fees were treated as fees for technical services under Article 12(2) of the India-Japan DTAA because the supervisory contracts were severable from the supply contracts and the record did not establish that the receipts were effectively connected with any permanent establishment in India. A liaison office that only facilitated communications did not amount to a supervisory permanent establishment, and purchase orders and supervision periods could not be aggregated to create the required treaty connection. The no force of attraction principle was applied. For assessment year 1995-96, incomplete contract details prevented a final conclusion on certain contracts, so that limited issue was remanded for fresh decision. en-us Thu, 27 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 21 Mar 2015 14:35:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244836 Supervisory fees were treated as fees for technical services under Article 12(2) of the India-Japan DTAA because the supervisory contracts were severable from the supply contracts and the record did not establish that the receipts were effectively connected with any permanent establishment in India. A liaison office that only facilitated communications did not amount to a supervisory permanent establishment, and purchase orders and supervision periods could not be aggregated to create the required treaty connection. The no force of attraction principle was applied. For assessment year 1995-96, incomplete contract details prevented a final conclusion on certain contracts, so that limited issue was remanded for fresh decision. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 27 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244836