https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446257 A dependent agent permanent establishment under Article 5(4)(i) of the India-Mauritius DTAA arises only where the agent has and habitually exercises authority to conclude contracts on behalf of the foreign enterprise; on the facts discussed, Taj India did not satisfy that test for either distribution revenue or advertisement revenue. The note also states that payments for programming rights, transponder charges and uplinking charges were not royalty under the treaty definition because they were not consideration for the use of copyright, process or equipment, and the wider domestic-law definition introduced by the Finance Act, 2012 did not expand the treaty meaning. On that basis, disallowance for failure to withhold tax was not attracted. en-us Thu, 26 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 29 Nov 2023 06:59:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446257 A dependent agent permanent establishment under Article 5(4)(i) of the India-Mauritius DTAA arises only where the agent has and habitually exercises authority to conclude contracts on behalf of the foreign enterprise; on the facts discussed, Taj India did not satisfy that test for either distribution revenue or advertisement revenue. The note also states that payments for programming rights, transponder charges and uplinking charges were not royalty under the treaty definition because they were not consideration for the use of copyright, process or equipment, and the wider domestic-law definition introduced by the Finance Act, 2012 did not expand the treaty meaning. On that basis, disallowance for failure to withhold tax was not attracted. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 26 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446257