<?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>1988 (1) TMI 78 - ITAT CALCUTTA-E</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=60760</link>
    <description>Under the India-Norway treaty, consideration for the limited right to use confidential designs, plans, information and similar protected materials was treated as royalty and therefore taxable in India, because the agreements granted only restricted use rights with confidentiality obligations rather than an outright transfer. By contrast, a remittance made for placing the assessee&#039;s engineer at the disposal of an Indian company for technical assistance was treated as part of industrial or commercial profits, not as personal services or royalty, and was not taxable in the assessee&#039;s hands. The analysis turns on the treaty definition of royalty and the distinction between a licence to use protected know-how and payment for technical assistance through an engineer.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Jan 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 06 Feb 2011 02:54:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=99207" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1988 (1) TMI 78 - ITAT CALCUTTA-E</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=60760</link>
      <description>Under the India-Norway treaty, consideration for the limited right to use confidential designs, plans, information and similar protected materials was treated as royalty and therefore taxable in India, because the agreements granted only restricted use rights with confidentiality obligations rather than an outright transfer. By contrast, a remittance made for placing the assessee&#039;s engineer at the disposal of an Indian company for technical assistance was treated as part of industrial or commercial profits, not as personal services or royalty, and was not taxable in the assessee&#039;s hands. The analysis turns on the treaty definition of royalty and the distinction between a licence to use protected know-how and payment for technical assistance through an engineer.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Jan 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=60760</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>