<?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>2005 (6) TMI 213 - ITAT BANGALORE-B</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=57824</link>
    <description>Payments to a non-resident for technical, start-up and turnkey services connected with a power project were treated as fees for technical services under section 9(1)(vii) and as fees for included services under Article 12(4) of the India-USA DTAA because the services made available technical knowledge, experience, skill, know-how or processes. Article 12(5) did not apply, as the services were not merely ancillary to a sale of property or inextricably linked only to equipment supply. The sum was therefore chargeable to tax in India, section 195 withholding was mandatory, and the payer could not avoid deduction on the basis of the payee&#039;s view or lack of unilateral deduction application; section 201 default consequences followed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jun 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Dec 2010 18:01:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=96282" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (6) TMI 213 - ITAT BANGALORE-B</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=57824</link>
      <description>Payments to a non-resident for technical, start-up and turnkey services connected with a power project were treated as fees for technical services under section 9(1)(vii) and as fees for included services under Article 12(4) of the India-USA DTAA because the services made available technical knowledge, experience, skill, know-how or processes. Article 12(5) did not apply, as the services were not merely ancillary to a sale of property or inextricably linked only to equipment supply. The sum was therefore chargeable to tax in India, section 195 withholding was mandatory, and the payer could not avoid deduction on the basis of the payee&#039;s view or lack of unilateral deduction application; section 201 default consequences followed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jun 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=57824</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>