<?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>Permanent establishment tests: independent subsidiary premises and principal-to-principal dealings did not create Indian taxability for offshore supplies.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=104691</link>
    <description>Fixed place permanent establishment requires evidence that the foreign enterprise has a right to use or control the Indian subsidiary&#039;s premises for its business; group-wide Form 10-K and website material do not establish that condition. A subsidiary relationship alone is insufficient. Dependent agency permanent establishment also requires authority to conclude contracts or habitual order securing for the foreign enterprise. Independent principal-to-principal dealings, the subsidiary&#039;s separate manufacturing operations, and a licence arrangement confined to royalty-bearing products did not satisfy those conditions. Neither form of permanent establishment arose, so no Indian profits were attributable to the disputed offshore supplies and the attribution was deleted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2026 08:45:20 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2026 08:45:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=928554" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Permanent establishment tests: independent subsidiary premises and principal-to-principal dealings did not create Indian taxability for offshore supplies.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=104691</link>
      <description>Fixed place permanent establishment requires evidence that the foreign enterprise has a right to use or control the Indian subsidiary&#039;s premises for its business; group-wide Form 10-K and website material do not establish that condition. A subsidiary relationship alone is insufficient. Dependent agency permanent establishment also requires authority to conclude contracts or habitual order securing for the foreign enterprise. Independent principal-to-principal dealings, the subsidiary&#039;s separate manufacturing operations, and a licence arrangement confined to royalty-bearing products did not satisfy those conditions. Neither form of permanent establishment arose, so no Indian profits were attributable to the disputed offshore supplies and the attribution was deleted.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2026 08:45:20 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=104691</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>