<?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>2024 (11) TMI 1196 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762210</link>
    <description>Arbitral award receipts arising from an offshore supply contract were characterised as business income rather than income from other sources because they represented compensation for non-payment of contractual dues and were inseparable from the underlying business transaction. In the absence of a permanent establishment in India, the principal amount was held not chargeable to tax in India. The interest component on delayed contractual compensation was also treated as part of the same business receipt and not as a separate taxable source, and the duplicated addition was directed to be deleted. As the substantive additions were removed, penalty proceedings under section 270A did not survive.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 Nov 2024 08:58:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=779306" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (11) TMI 1196 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762210</link>
      <description>Arbitral award receipts arising from an offshore supply contract were characterised as business income rather than income from other sources because they represented compensation for non-payment of contractual dues and were inseparable from the underlying business transaction. In the absence of a permanent establishment in India, the principal amount was held not chargeable to tax in India. The interest component on delayed contractual compensation was also treated as part of the same business receipt and not as a separate taxable source, and the duplicated addition was directed to be deleted. As the substantive additions were removed, penalty proceedings under section 270A did not survive.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762210</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>