https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268483 Payment to a US consultant required factual verification to determine whether it constituted fees for included services or royalty under the India-US DTAA. The record suggested the consultant was engaged mainly to review the crane design and recommend improvements, but it was unclear whether those inputs were only advisory or amounted to development and transfer of a technical plan or design. Because the lower authorities had not examined that distinction clearly, the issue was not finally decided on merits and was remitted to the Assessing Officer for verification of the consultant's actual role and the applicability of Article 12. en-us Mon, 31 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Nov 2015 10:54:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268483 Payment to a US consultant required factual verification to determine whether it constituted fees for included services or royalty under the India-US DTAA. The record suggested the consultant was engaged mainly to review the crane design and recommend improvements, but it was unclear whether those inputs were only advisory or amounted to development and transfer of a technical plan or design. Because the lower authorities had not examined that distinction clearly, the issue was not finally decided on merits and was remitted to the Assessing Officer for verification of the consultant's actual role and the applicability of Article 12. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 31 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268483