<?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 (12) TMI 470 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352201</link>
    <description>Guarantee commission received from Indian subsidiaries was analysed under the India-UK tax treaty and domestic law. It was found not to be interest, business profits, or fee for technical services because it was not a debt-claim payment, no permanent establishment was shown, and no technical or consultancy services were made available; in the absence of a specific treaty article, it remained taxable in India as residual income. Reimbursement of salary paid to a seconded expatriate employee was not finally characterised, because the record was incomplete on the secondment arrangement, employment terms, and functional control, so the matter was remitted for fresh examination of the agreements and supporting material.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 09 Dec 2017 12:45:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=499178" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (12) TMI 470 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352201</link>
      <description>Guarantee commission received from Indian subsidiaries was analysed under the India-UK tax treaty and domestic law. It was found not to be interest, business profits, or fee for technical services because it was not a debt-claim payment, no permanent establishment was shown, and no technical or consultancy services were made available; in the absence of a specific treaty article, it remained taxable in India as residual income. Reimbursement of salary paid to a seconded expatriate employee was not finally characterised, because the record was incomplete on the secondment arrangement, employment terms, and functional control, so the matter was remitted for fresh examination of the agreements and supporting material.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352201</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>