<?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 (8) TMI 1723 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296084</link>
    <description>Amounts received by a non-resident under a cost reimbursement arrangement with an Indian group company were characterised as reimbursements, not royalty. The payments were linked to actual rebate and discount outgoings, described as administration charges, and matched the assessee&#039;s reimbursement obligations without any mark-up. Because the receipts represented recovery of actual expenses and not consideration for use of brand or other rights, they did not fall within royalty under section 9(1)(vi). The transfer pricing treatment in the payer&#039;s proceedings also supported the same factual character. The addition was deleted and the receipts were treated as not taxable in India.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Jul 2021 08:55:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=648575" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (8) TMI 1723 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296084</link>
      <description>Amounts received by a non-resident under a cost reimbursement arrangement with an Indian group company were characterised as reimbursements, not royalty. The payments were linked to actual rebate and discount outgoings, described as administration charges, and matched the assessee&#039;s reimbursement obligations without any mark-up. Because the receipts represented recovery of actual expenses and not consideration for use of brand or other rights, they did not fall within royalty under section 9(1)(vi). The transfer pricing treatment in the payer&#039;s proceedings also supported the same factual character. The addition was deleted and the receipts were treated as not taxable in India.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296084</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>