<?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>2022 (4) TMI 1014 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=421348</link>
    <description>Permanent establishment status under the India-UAE DTAA depended on whether the assessee&#039;s project office and contract activities in India constituted a treaty PE. Earlier assessments relied upon by the Assessing Officer had been set aside for prior years, and subsequent appellate proceedings followed the position that no PE existed in India. Without a PE, contract profits could not be attributed to India, and interest income could not be taxed as income of a PE.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Apr 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 21 Apr 2022 14:11:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=676788" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (4) TMI 1014 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=421348</link>
      <description>Permanent establishment status under the India-UAE DTAA depended on whether the assessee&#039;s project office and contract activities in India constituted a treaty PE. Earlier assessments relied upon by the Assessing Officer had been set aside for prior years, and subsequent appellate proceedings followed the position that no PE existed in India. Without a PE, contract profits could not be attributed to India, and interest income could not be taxed as income of a PE.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Apr 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=421348</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>