<?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>2005 (7) TMI 31 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6585</link>
    <description>The Authority ruled that the condition specified under sub-clause (c) of clause 2 of Article 15 of the DTAA relates to the taxability of employees and not the applicant. Therefore, it is not relevant when Dutch BV is taxed in India on a presumptive basis under Section 44D and Section 115A of the Act. The ruling was pronounced on July 15, 2005.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 15 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=45668" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (7) TMI 31 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6585</link>
      <description>The Authority ruled that the condition specified under sub-clause (c) of clause 2 of Article 15 of the DTAA relates to the taxability of employees and not the applicant. Therefore, it is not relevant when Dutch BV is taxed in India on a presumptive basis under Section 44D and Section 115A of the Act. The ruling was pronounced on July 15, 2005.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6585</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>