<?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>2018 (11) TMI 1119 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370776</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of IBM India, stating that reimbursements to IBM Overseas entities were not Fees for Technical Services (FTS) taxable in India under the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA). It was held that IBM India was not obligated to deduct tax at source on these reimbursements. Additionally, payments to IBM Philippines were not taxable in India due to the absence of an FTS clause in the DTAA and the lack of a Permanent Establishment (PE) in India. The Tribunal also clarified that higher Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) rates did not apply when treaty benefits were available, even if the non-resident payee did not have a PAN in India.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Jun 2026 17:12:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=543390" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (11) TMI 1119 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370776</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of IBM India, stating that reimbursements to IBM Overseas entities were not Fees for Technical Services (FTS) taxable in India under the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA). It was held that IBM India was not obligated to deduct tax at source on these reimbursements. Additionally, payments to IBM Philippines were not taxable in India due to the absence of an FTS clause in the DTAA and the lack of a Permanent Establishment (PE) in India. The Tribunal also clarified that higher Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) rates did not apply when treaty benefits were available, even if the non-resident payee did not have a PAN in India.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370776</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>