<?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>2009 (9) TMI 26 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34590</link>
    <description>A foreign enterprise undertaking an installation and assembly project was held not to have a permanent establishment in India on the facts presented, because work performed by an independent sub-contractor at its own workshop could not be attributed to the enterprise as a fixed place of business or deemed presence. Occasional supervisory visits and preliminary activities were insufficient to meet the treaty duration and presence requirements, so business profits were not taxable in India under Article 7. The designing element of the contract was also treated as incidental to project execution, not as separate managerial, technical or consultancy services, and therefore was not taxable as fees for technical services.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 08 Mar 2010 10:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=73208" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (9) TMI 26 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34590</link>
      <description>A foreign enterprise undertaking an installation and assembly project was held not to have a permanent establishment in India on the facts presented, because work performed by an independent sub-contractor at its own workshop could not be attributed to the enterprise as a fixed place of business or deemed presence. Occasional supervisory visits and preliminary activities were insufficient to meet the treaty duration and presence requirements, so business profits were not taxable in India under Article 7. The designing element of the contract was also treated as incidental to project execution, not as separate managerial, technical or consultancy services, and therefore was not taxable as fees for technical services.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34590</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>