<?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 81 - UTTARANCHAL High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=10713</link>
    <description>Treaty relief under article 16 of the relevant double taxation agreements depends on strict fulfilment of all cumulative conditions, including proof that the remuneration is not deductible in computing profits chargeable in the other Contracting State. Where that proof is not produced, the exemption is unavailable. The text also states that section 44BB applies as a special deeming provision for non-resident assessees engaged in services connected with mineral oil operations, and that absence of a permanent establishment or allegations of treaty shopping do not displace the treaty conditions themselves. On the stated facts, the domestic provision prevails and no treaty-based exemption is available.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 22 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 Jul 2009 10:54:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=49734" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (7) TMI 81 - UTTARANCHAL High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=10713</link>
      <description>Treaty relief under article 16 of the relevant double taxation agreements depends on strict fulfilment of all cumulative conditions, including proof that the remuneration is not deductible in computing profits chargeable in the other Contracting State. Where that proof is not produced, the exemption is unavailable. The text also states that section 44BB applies as a special deeming provision for non-resident assessees engaged in services connected with mineral oil operations, and that absence of a permanent establishment or allegations of treaty shopping do not displace the treaty conditions themselves. On the stated facts, the domestic provision prevails and no treaty-based exemption is available.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=10713</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>