<?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>2019 (1) TMI 692 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373527</link>
    <description>Treaty protection for professional fees paid to non-resident LLPs prevailed over the domestic deeming rule where the relevant DTAA covered professional services and the record did not show that technical knowledge, experience or skill was made available to the payer. On that basis, the sums were not chargeable to tax in India, no withholding tax obligation arose, and disallowance under section 40(a)(i) was deleted. Interest paid for delayed deposit of service tax was treated as compensatory rather than penal, and in the absence of a specific statutory bar comparable to income-tax interest, the expenditure was held not disallowable under section 37(1).</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 10 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Jan 2019 12:03:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=553016" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (1) TMI 692 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373527</link>
      <description>Treaty protection for professional fees paid to non-resident LLPs prevailed over the domestic deeming rule where the relevant DTAA covered professional services and the record did not show that technical knowledge, experience or skill was made available to the payer. On that basis, the sums were not chargeable to tax in India, no withholding tax obligation arose, and disallowance under section 40(a)(i) was deleted. Interest paid for delayed deposit of service tax was treated as compensatory rather than penal, and in the absence of a specific statutory bar comparable to income-tax interest, the expenditure was held not disallowable under section 37(1).</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373527</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>