https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=422414 Under Article 5 of the India-Singapore DTAA, the Indian entity's premises could not be treated as the assessee's fixed place of business because it functioned as a non-exclusive distributor and service provider, and the marketing support arrangement characterised it as an independent contractor without authority to conclude contracts. A dependent agent PE was also not established because direct sales were made from Singapore and no employees visited India. The Revenue's reliance on third-party statements was undermined because they were not confronted to the assessee and no cross-examination was provided. The Revenue therefore failed to discharge the burden of proving a PE in India. en-us Fri, 29 Apr 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 14 May 2022 08:39:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=422414 Under Article 5 of the India-Singapore DTAA, the Indian entity's premises could not be treated as the assessee's fixed place of business because it functioned as a non-exclusive distributor and service provider, and the marketing support arrangement characterised it as an independent contractor without authority to conclude contracts. A dependent agent PE was also not established because direct sales were made from Singapore and no employees visited India. The Revenue's reliance on third-party statements was undermined because they were not confronted to the assessee and no cross-examination was provided. The Revenue therefore failed to discharge the burden of proving a PE in India. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 29 Apr 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=422414