<?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>2015 (5) TMI 708 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259834</link>
    <description>Receipts for software-related expenditure and cross-charged IT programmes are treated as royalty under the Income-tax Act and the India-USA tax treaty where the assessee fails to prove a contractual reimbursement arrangement and binding jurisdictional precedent already covers the issue. Receipts described as relocation expenses may be accepted as cost-to-cost reimbursement only if the underlying agreement and supporting evidence establish that character; where the record is incomplete and additional material is relevant, the matter requires fresh factual verification. The result is that royalty treatment is sustained for the software receipts, while the relocation-expense issue is remanded for de novo examination.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 23 May 2015 21:49:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=385809" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (5) TMI 708 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259834</link>
      <description>Receipts for software-related expenditure and cross-charged IT programmes are treated as royalty under the Income-tax Act and the India-USA tax treaty where the assessee fails to prove a contractual reimbursement arrangement and binding jurisdictional precedent already covers the issue. Receipts described as relocation expenses may be accepted as cost-to-cost reimbursement only if the underlying agreement and supporting evidence establish that character; where the record is incomplete and additional material is relevant, the matter requires fresh factual verification. The result is that royalty treatment is sustained for the software receipts, while the relocation-expense issue is remanded for de novo examination.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259834</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>