<?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 (4) TMI 280 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377836</link>
    <description>A foreign enterprise&#039;s offshore supply income was held not taxable in India where the Revenue failed to establish a permanent establishment under Article 5 of the India-Finland treaty. The Tribunal applied the disposal test and found that co-location, administrative support, customer interface, and employee participation by the Indian entity did not amount to a fixed place, place of management, office, sales outlet, installation, supervisory, or dependent agent permanent establishment; the related attribution and hardware-software split issues therefore fell away. It also rejected taxation of notional interest on delayed vendor-financing consideration, holding that tax can arise only on real income that has accrued, been received, or become legally receivable. The proposed interest addition was deleted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 04 Apr 2019 07:20:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=565527" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (4) TMI 280 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377836</link>
      <description>A foreign enterprise&#039;s offshore supply income was held not taxable in India where the Revenue failed to establish a permanent establishment under Article 5 of the India-Finland treaty. The Tribunal applied the disposal test and found that co-location, administrative support, customer interface, and employee participation by the Indian entity did not amount to a fixed place, place of management, office, sales outlet, installation, supervisory, or dependent agent permanent establishment; the related attribution and hardware-software split issues therefore fell away. It also rejected taxation of notional interest on delayed vendor-financing consideration, holding that tax can arise only on real income that has accrued, been received, or become legally receivable. The proposed interest addition was deleted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377836</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>