<?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>1987 (5) TMI 8 - CALCUTTA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25072</link>
    <description>Payments under a collaboration agreement for supply of confidential data, assistance and information on working methods and manufacturing processes were treated as royalty where the know-how was exclusive, secret and for the Indian company&#039;s limited use. The court stated that royalty is not confined to consideration under a formal patent licence; it can extend to payment for the use of exclusive rights or secret business know-how having the character of a capital asset. Contractual labels and the method of computation were not decisive. On these facts, the amount attributable to manufacturing know-how was royalty, not technical service fees, in favour of the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 May 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 25 Jan 2010 11:55:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=64070" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1987 (5) TMI 8 - CALCUTTA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25072</link>
      <description>Payments under a collaboration agreement for supply of confidential data, assistance and information on working methods and manufacturing processes were treated as royalty where the know-how was exclusive, secret and for the Indian company&#039;s limited use. The court stated that royalty is not confined to consideration under a formal patent licence; it can extend to payment for the use of exclusive rights or secret business know-how having the character of a capital asset. Contractual labels and the method of computation were not decisive. On these facts, the amount attributable to manufacturing know-how was royalty, not technical service fees, in favour of the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 May 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25072</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>