https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467135 A foreign enterprise's Indian subsidiary was held not to be a permanent establishment under the India-USA DTAA because the premises were not at the foreign enterprise's disposal, the subsidiary operated its own business, and no dependent agency or qualifying service presence was proved. Without a PE, no profit attribution survived. Revenue transfers under global deals could not be treated as notional royalty absent any contractual obligation to pay royalty, and the proposed enhancement lacked support under section 9(1)(vi) or the treaty royalty article. Training and consulting receipts were also outside royalty, as they did not involve any right to use intellectual property. Interest under section 234B was to be charged as per law. en-us Fri, 02 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Mar 2026 15:02:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467135 A foreign enterprise's Indian subsidiary was held not to be a permanent establishment under the India-USA DTAA because the premises were not at the foreign enterprise's disposal, the subsidiary operated its own business, and no dependent agency or qualifying service presence was proved. Without a PE, no profit attribution survived. Revenue transfers under global deals could not be treated as notional royalty absent any contractual obligation to pay royalty, and the proposed enhancement lacked support under section 9(1)(vi) or the treaty royalty article. Training and consulting receipts were also outside royalty, as they did not involve any right to use intellectual property. Interest under section 234B was to be charged as per law. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 02 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467135