<?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>1998 (11) TMI 111 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16355</link>
    <description>The High Court affirmed the Tribunal&#039;s decision that 25% of the export commission received by the assessee was not taxable under sections 9(1)(vi) or 9(1)(vii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Court held that the payment for forgoing export sales did not fall under the definitions of &#039;royalty&#039; or &#039;fees for technical services&#039; as it did not involve imparting technical knowledge or consultancy services. The reference was disposed of without any costs awarded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 26 Nov 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Sep 2009 12:11:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=55355" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (11) TMI 111 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16355</link>
      <description>The High Court affirmed the Tribunal&#039;s decision that 25% of the export commission received by the assessee was not taxable under sections 9(1)(vi) or 9(1)(vii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Court held that the payment for forgoing export sales did not fall under the definitions of &#039;royalty&#039; or &#039;fees for technical services&#039; as it did not involve imparting technical knowledge or consultancy services. The reference was disposed of without any costs awarded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Nov 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16355</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>