<?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>2003 (2) TMI 35 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11782</link>
    <description>Payments made by a resident purchaser to a non-resident supplier for experts&#039; services in erection, start-up and commissioning of imported machinery were examined for deemed accrual under ss. 5(2), 9(1)(i) and 9(1)(vii) of the Income-tax Act. On a cumulative reading of the main supply contract and the supplementary agreement, the HC held they formed a single, indivisible principal-to-principal transaction, and the technical services were inextricably linked to fulfilment of the sale, constituting part of the sale consideration rather than severable business income or a separate fee for technical services. Consequently, no &quot;business connection&quot; arose under s. 9(1)(i) and s. 9(1)(vii) was inapplicable; in any event, the payments fell within the exclusion in Expln. 2 to s. 9(1)(vii), and were not taxable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 04 Feb 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 26 Dec 2025 16:38:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=50795" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (2) TMI 35 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11782</link>
      <description>Payments made by a resident purchaser to a non-resident supplier for experts&#039; services in erection, start-up and commissioning of imported machinery were examined for deemed accrual under ss. 5(2), 9(1)(i) and 9(1)(vii) of the Income-tax Act. On a cumulative reading of the main supply contract and the supplementary agreement, the HC held they formed a single, indivisible principal-to-principal transaction, and the technical services were inextricably linked to fulfilment of the sale, constituting part of the sale consideration rather than severable business income or a separate fee for technical services. Consequently, no &quot;business connection&quot; arose under s. 9(1)(i) and s. 9(1)(vii) was inapplicable; in any event, the payments fell within the exclusion in Expln. 2 to s. 9(1)(vii), and were not taxable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 04 Feb 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11782</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>