<?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 (1) TMI 1537 - ITAT COCHIN</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283763</link>
    <description>Payments for management and consultancy support to a non-resident were treated as fees for included services under the India-USA DTAA because the foreign company provided knowledge, expertise, advice, training, and decision-making support across managerial, financial, legal, treasury, and risk functions. The absence of the word &quot;managerial&quot; in the treaty was not decisive where technical knowledge, experience, skill, know-how, or processes were made available, so the receipts were taxable in India. As tax was deductible under section 195, the assessee&#039;s withholding obligation was triggered and liability under section 201(1) and 201(1A) followed; the cash-basis argument and reliance on Circular No. 7/2007 were rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 29 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Oct 2019 10:29:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=590341" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (1) TMI 1537 - ITAT COCHIN</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283763</link>
      <description>Payments for management and consultancy support to a non-resident were treated as fees for included services under the India-USA DTAA because the foreign company provided knowledge, expertise, advice, training, and decision-making support across managerial, financial, legal, treasury, and risk functions. The absence of the word &quot;managerial&quot; in the treaty was not decisive where technical knowledge, experience, skill, know-how, or processes were made available, so the receipts were taxable in India. As tax was deductible under section 195, the assessee&#039;s withholding obligation was triggered and liability under section 201(1) and 201(1A) followed; the cash-basis argument and reliance on Circular No. 7/2007 were rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283763</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>