<?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>2017 (2) TMI 330 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338630</link>
    <description>Travelling expenditure claimed within a foreign agent&#039;s commission was disallowed under section 37 because the agreement did not separately provide for, or substantiate, such business outlay. Payments to the UK concern for drawings, design and supervision were treated as part of a composite technical arrangement involving work and supervision in India, so they fell within fees for technical services under the UK treaty and were taxable in India, requiring deduction of tax at source under section 195. Credits described as advances from three concerns were also sustained as additions because the assessee failed to produce reliable supporting records, bills, or reconciliations.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 12 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2017 12:32:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=457909" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (2) TMI 330 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338630</link>
      <description>Travelling expenditure claimed within a foreign agent&#039;s commission was disallowed under section 37 because the agreement did not separately provide for, or substantiate, such business outlay. Payments to the UK concern for drawings, design and supervision were treated as part of a composite technical arrangement involving work and supervision in India, so they fell within fees for technical services under the UK treaty and were taxable in India, requiring deduction of tax at source under section 195. Credits described as advances from three concerns were also sustained as additions because the assessee failed to produce reliable supporting records, bills, or reconciliations.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 12 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338630</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>