https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339527 Remittance made to a non-resident for purchase of equipment and appliances for research was analysed as consideration for goods, not royalty, because the invoice and agreement did not show payment for the use of scientific knowledge, experience, or other royalty-bearing rights. The fact that the purchase formed part of a research project did not by itself make the payment taxable in India; the relevant inquiry was whether the income embedded in that remittance was chargeable to tax. In the absence of a taxable event or a permanent establishment of the supplier, no withholding obligation arose under section 195, and the consequential demands under sections 195A, 206AA, 201(1) and 201(1A) did not survive. en-us Mon, 30 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 01 Mar 2017 09:05:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339527 Remittance made to a non-resident for purchase of equipment and appliances for research was analysed as consideration for goods, not royalty, because the invoice and agreement did not show payment for the use of scientific knowledge, experience, or other royalty-bearing rights. The fact that the purchase formed part of a research project did not by itself make the payment taxable in India; the relevant inquiry was whether the income embedded in that remittance was chargeable to tax. In the absence of a taxable event or a permanent establishment of the supplier, no withholding obligation arose under section 195, and the consequential demands under sections 195A, 206AA, 201(1) and 201(1A) did not survive. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 30 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339527