<?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>Make available test under India-UK DTAA: intra-group support services were not fees for technical services.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98972</link>
    <description>Cross-charged intra-group support services under the India-UK DTAA did not meet the make available requirement for fees for technical services. The Court held that centralized support and supervision, with technical control and know-how remaining with the parent company, did not amount to transfer of technical knowledge, skill, know-how or processes to the Indian entity. Mere guidance or incidental employee skill development was insufficient because there was no material showing independent application of technical know-how by the Indian entity. The receipts were therefore not taxable as fees for technical services under Article 13, and the Revenue&#039;s appeal was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 20 Apr 2026 08:30:26 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 Apr 2026 08:30:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=897452" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Make available test under India-UK DTAA: intra-group support services were not fees for technical services.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98972</link>
      <description>Cross-charged intra-group support services under the India-UK DTAA did not meet the make available requirement for fees for technical services. The Court held that centralized support and supervision, with technical control and know-how remaining with the parent company, did not amount to transfer of technical knowledge, skill, know-how or processes to the Indian entity. Mere guidance or incidental employee skill development was insufficient because there was no material showing independent application of technical know-how by the Indian entity. The receipts were therefore not taxable as fees for technical services under Article 13, and the Revenue&#039;s appeal was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 20 Apr 2026 08:30:26 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98972</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>