https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=92136 ITAT held that two individuals whose travel expenses were reimbursed were employees of the taxpayer's associated enterprise (AE) and constituted an enterprise's personnel, not employees of the taxpayer; consequently their presence in India could not be attributed to the taxpayer for computing stay under Article 5(3)(b) of the DTAA. The Tribunal found the Assessing Officer's inclusion of those days to create a deemed PE was based on conjecture and contrary to the factual record. The additions made by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A) were deleted, and the appeal was allowed in favour of the taxpayer. en-us Tue, 02 Sep 2025 08:01:26 +0530 Tue, 02 Sep 2025 08:01:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=92136 ITAT held that two individuals whose travel expenses were reimbursed were employees of the taxpayer's associated enterprise (AE) and constituted an enterprise's personnel, not employees of the taxpayer; consequently their presence in India could not be attributed to the taxpayer for computing stay under Article 5(3)(b) of the DTAA. The Tribunal found the Assessing Officer's inclusion of those days to create a deemed PE was based on conjecture and contrary to the factual record. The additions made by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A) were deleted, and the appeal was allowed in favour of the taxpayer. Highlights Income Tax Tue, 02 Sep 2025 08:01:26 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=92136