https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=59722 The Tribunal ruled that the ancillary services provided by the assessee did not qualify for exemption under Article 8 of the Indo-US Treaty, reversing the CIT(A)'s decision and upholding the AO's denial of exemption. It also upheld the CIT(A)'s decision regarding the non-applicability of interest under Section 234B, as tax was deductible at source. Furthermore, the Tribunal denied the exemption for interest income on fixed deposits under Article 8(5), as the deposits were not connected with aircraft operations. The appeals of the Revenue were allowed, except for ITA No. 4699/Mum/2002, which was partly allowed, and the assessee's appeal was dismissed. en-us Mon, 29 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 09 Dec 2023 19:26:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=59722 The Tribunal ruled that the ancillary services provided by the assessee did not qualify for exemption under Article 8 of the Indo-US Treaty, reversing the CIT(A)'s decision and upholding the AO's denial of exemption. It also upheld the CIT(A)'s decision regarding the non-applicability of interest under Section 234B, as tax was deductible at source. Furthermore, the Tribunal denied the exemption for interest income on fixed deposits under Article 8(5), as the deposits were not connected with aircraft operations. The appeals of the Revenue were allowed, except for ITA No. 4699/Mum/2002, which was partly allowed, and the assessee's appeal was dismissed. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 29 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=59722