https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32791 Receipts under a composite engineering contract were treated as royalty because the applicant supplied conceptual engineering services and engineering deliverables, including designs, drawings and technical documentation, falling within Article 12 of the India-Australia DTAA and section 9(1)(vi). No permanent establishment in India was found, as the services were mainly performed from Australia and the India visits were intermittent and limited. The receipts nevertheless remained fully taxable in India, because substantial contract-related activities in India created sufficient territorial nexus and the contract was not severable into offshore and onshore parts for apportionment. The apportionment argument was rejected and the entire royalty receipt was held taxable in India. en-us Mon, 30 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 May 2009 17:32:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32791 Receipts under a composite engineering contract were treated as royalty because the applicant supplied conceptual engineering services and engineering deliverables, including designs, drawings and technical documentation, falling within Article 12 of the India-Australia DTAA and section 9(1)(vi). No permanent establishment in India was found, as the services were mainly performed from Australia and the India visits were intermittent and limited. The receipts nevertheless remained fully taxable in India, because substantial contract-related activities in India created sufficient territorial nexus and the contract was not severable into offshore and onshore parts for apportionment. The apportionment argument was rejected and the entire royalty receipt was held taxable in India. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 30 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32791