<?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>2016 (11) TMI 65 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334047</link>
    <description>Receipts for services partly performed through an Indian permanent establishment and partly from the United Kingdom were treated as fees for technical services under domestic law because the payer carried on business in India and the source remained in India. Article 13(6) of the India-UK DTAA did not shift the balance receipts into business profits under Article 7, as only fees actually and functionally connected with the permanent establishment qualify for that treatment; independently performed head-office services do not. The make available condition was also satisfied because the services transferred rules, documentation, guidelines and related know-how in a form the recipient could use independently. The disputed receipts were therefore taxable as fees for technical services.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 04 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2016 10:58:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=446506" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (11) TMI 65 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334047</link>
      <description>Receipts for services partly performed through an Indian permanent establishment and partly from the United Kingdom were treated as fees for technical services under domestic law because the payer carried on business in India and the source remained in India. Article 13(6) of the India-UK DTAA did not shift the balance receipts into business profits under Article 7, as only fees actually and functionally connected with the permanent establishment qualify for that treatment; independently performed head-office services do not. The make available condition was also satisfied because the services transferred rules, documentation, guidelines and related know-how in a form the recipient could use independently. The disputed receipts were therefore taxable as fees for technical services.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 04 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334047</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>