<?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 (12) TMI 1338 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336693</link>
    <description>Transponder charges paid to a non-resident satellite service provider were treated as not taxable in India under the applicable tax treaty, because the treaty&#039;s royalty definition was regarded as exhaustive and the retrospective expansion of section 9(1)(vi) could not override it. The payment also did not qualify as fees for technical services, as no technical knowledge or skill was made available to the payer, and no business connection in India was established merely from use of transponder capacity by Indian customers. As the payment was not taxable in the non-resident&#039;s hands, no withholding obligation under section 195 arose. The claim for interest on refund under section 244A was remitted for fresh examination.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 24 Dec 2016 11:49:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=453124" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (12) TMI 1338 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336693</link>
      <description>Transponder charges paid to a non-resident satellite service provider were treated as not taxable in India under the applicable tax treaty, because the treaty&#039;s royalty definition was regarded as exhaustive and the retrospective expansion of section 9(1)(vi) could not override it. The payment also did not qualify as fees for technical services, as no technical knowledge or skill was made available to the payer, and no business connection in India was established merely from use of transponder capacity by Indian customers. As the payment was not taxable in the non-resident&#039;s hands, no withholding obligation under section 195 arose. The claim for interest on refund under section 244A was remitted for fresh examination.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336693</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>