<?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 (9) TMI 1678 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459836</link>
    <description>Interconnect service charges paid to a non-resident telecom operator were examined on the question whether they constituted royalty and were chargeable to tax. The High Court followed an earlier Coordinate Bench ruling that such charges do not amount to royalty, and found no infirmity in the order under challenge. The issue was accordingly answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 02 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Dec 2024 19:58:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=785174" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (9) TMI 1678 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459836</link>
      <description>Interconnect service charges paid to a non-resident telecom operator were examined on the question whether they constituted royalty and were chargeable to tax. The High Court followed an earlier Coordinate Bench ruling that such charges do not amount to royalty, and found no infirmity in the order under challenge. The issue was accordingly answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459836</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>