https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388861 Bandwidth service payments were not royalty under the India-Singapore DTAA or section 9(1)(vi) because the arrangement involved standard access services, not use of equipment or a process, and the domestic-law enlargement in Explanation 6 could not override the treaty definition. Article 3(2) did not permit importing the domestic meaning of "process" into an already defined treaty term. Operations and maintenance charges were also not fees for technical services because the services were routine and did not make available technical knowledge, skill, know-how, or processes to the recipient. The withholding demand therefore failed on both heads and the appellate relief was affirmed. en-us Fri, 15 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 17 Feb 2020 17:07:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388861 Bandwidth service payments were not royalty under the India-Singapore DTAA or section 9(1)(vi) because the arrangement involved standard access services, not use of equipment or a process, and the domestic-law enlargement in Explanation 6 could not override the treaty definition. Article 3(2) did not permit importing the domestic meaning of "process" into an already defined treaty term. Operations and maintenance charges were also not fees for technical services because the services were routine and did not make available technical knowledge, skill, know-how, or processes to the recipient. The withholding demand therefore failed on both heads and the appellate relief was affirmed. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 15 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388861