Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 16 (1.13 seconds)

C.I.T.,Delhi vs Bharti Hexacom Ltd. on 16 October, 2023

From the service agreement with the agents abroad, it is clear that the service rendered is essentially brokerage service even as stated in the very first clause to procure orders and in reference to market research abroad or co=ordination with the supplier or to ensure timely payment or making available its office space for visit by the suppliers. These are ordinarily the tasks, which any agent or a broker undertakes incident to brokerage service. Also, none of the commission agents have any place of business in India. Even if there be any, Explanation 1 to section 9(1)(i) of the Act would attract liability to Indian tax for a non-resident with business connections in India, only on income attributable to his operations in India. There can, therefore, be no liability under the domestic law. If there is also a Double Tax Avoidance Agreement, this inference is further buttressed, if they do not have permanent establishment in India or if they do have one, if they have no activity in India for earning such income. The law on the subject is settled at the level of the Supreme Court itself in CIT v. Toshuku Ltd. (1980) 125 ITR 525 (SC) and had been conceded in a number of circulars.
Supreme Court of India Cites 52 - Cited by 5 - B V Nagarathna - Full Document
1   2 Next