<?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>1986 (7) TMI 146 - ITAT BOMBAY-C</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=58775</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the non-resident company, holding that payments made by Indian companies for engineering services were not taxable in India under the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement with Germany. The Tribunal differentiated between payments classified as fees for technical services and those as royalty, following the interpretation that the term &quot;royalty&quot; in the Agreement excluded business receipts. The decision emphasized the necessity of aligning international agreements with the prevailing law at the time of enactment, ultimately dismissing the Department&#039;s appeal and supporting the non-resident company&#039;s position.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 06 Feb 2011 03:10:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=97231" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1986 (7) TMI 146 - ITAT BOMBAY-C</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=58775</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the non-resident company, holding that payments made by Indian companies for engineering services were not taxable in India under the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement with Germany. The Tribunal differentiated between payments classified as fees for technical services and those as royalty, following the interpretation that the term &quot;royalty&quot; in the Agreement excluded business receipts. The decision emphasized the necessity of aligning international agreements with the prevailing law at the time of enactment, ultimately dismissing the Department&#039;s appeal and supporting the non-resident company&#039;s position.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=58775</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>