<?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>2023 (8) TMI 1587 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459469</link>
    <description>The Indian entity&#039;s functions were limited to marketing support and customer education, while the agreement barred it from negotiating or concluding contracts and sales were made through independent distributors. On the material recorded, the statutory test for an agency permanent establishment was not satisfied because the entity did not habitually secure orders or exercise authority to conclude contracts. A later domestic-law amendment was held inapplicable to the years under consideration, and the treaty position for those years remained unchanged. The non-resident was therefore treated as having no permanent establishment in India, and the addition based on attribution to India was deleted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 14 Dec 2024 14:21:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=782808" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (8) TMI 1587 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459469</link>
      <description>The Indian entity&#039;s functions were limited to marketing support and customer education, while the agreement barred it from negotiating or concluding contracts and sales were made through independent distributors. On the material recorded, the statutory test for an agency permanent establishment was not satisfied because the entity did not habitually secure orders or exercise authority to conclude contracts. A later domestic-law amendment was held inapplicable to the years under consideration, and the treaty position for those years remained unchanged. The non-resident was therefore treated as having no permanent establishment in India, and the addition based on attribution to India was deleted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459469</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>