<?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>2026 (6) TMI 813 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793432</link>
    <description>Reimbursement of salary cost for seconded employees was not fee for technical services where the secondment agreement showed the employees were released by the foreign entity, integrated into the Indian company, and worked solely under its control, direction and supervision. The Indian company bore the salary cost, could evaluate, discipline and terminate the secondees, and the reimbursement was made on a cost-to-cost basis without markup. On these facts, the relationship during secondment was treated as employer and employee with the Indian company, so the payment was salary reimbursement rather than consideration for technical services. The Tribunal therefore held that the amount could not be taxed as fee for technical services and the addition was deleted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 27 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2026 08:32:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=907183" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (6) TMI 813 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793432</link>
      <description>Reimbursement of salary cost for seconded employees was not fee for technical services where the secondment agreement showed the employees were released by the foreign entity, integrated into the Indian company, and worked solely under its control, direction and supervision. The Indian company bore the salary cost, could evaluate, discipline and terminate the secondees, and the reimbursement was made on a cost-to-cost basis without markup. On these facts, the relationship during secondment was treated as employer and employee with the Indian company, so the payment was salary reimbursement rather than consideration for technical services. The Tribunal therefore held that the amount could not be taxed as fee for technical services and the addition was deleted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793432</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>