TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (12) TMI 389
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Bench at Bombay, has referred the following questions for our opinion and answer:- "(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a construction of the agreement dated 29th January, 1972 the Tribunal was justified in holding that the consideration receivable from Precision Bearings India Limited in terms of clause 17 of the agreement was mainly in the nature of royalty and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n 9(1)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961? (iv) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in apportioning only 80% of the consideration receivable in terms of clause 17 of the agreement dated 29th January, 1972, clause 15 of the agreement dated 18th August, 1979 and clause 13 of the agreement dated 3rd August, 1981 as being in the nature of fees for techni....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessment year 1981-82. In relation to this very Assessee for the assessment years 1982-83 and 1983-84, identical questions were referred for opinion and answer of this Court in Income Tax Reference No.145 of 1996. Mr. Joshi sought time to produce a copy of the order passed in this Income Tax Reference by this Court on 1st August, 2014 and equally, the judgment relied upon therein. That is in the c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and Federal Republic of Germany. The recipient of the income did not have permanent establishment in India. It is in these circumstances that the Tribunal has referred the question and to seek a answer as to whether the amount received would fall within the purview of the term 'Royalty' used in para 5 Article III (sic) of this Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement. The Tribunal took the vie....