<?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>2010 (11) TMI 1020 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183259</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the first appellate authority&#039;s decision that the payment for software purchase was business income, not royalty, as the supplier did not have a Permanent Establishment in India. The Tribunal cited precedents to support that software purchase payments are not considered royalty under the Income-tax Act or the DTAA. Consequently, the assessee&#039;s income was deemed non-taxable in India, leading to the dismissal of Revenue&#039;s appeals.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 Nov 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 Jun 2016 11:19:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=430420" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (11) TMI 1020 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183259</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the first appellate authority&#039;s decision that the payment for software purchase was business income, not royalty, as the supplier did not have a Permanent Establishment in India. The Tribunal cited precedents to support that software purchase payments are not considered royalty under the Income-tax Act or the DTAA. Consequently, the assessee&#039;s income was deemed non-taxable in India, leading to the dismissal of Revenue&#039;s appeals.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Nov 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183259</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>