Dismissing the appeal of the Revenue the Court held that  the assessee could not be reckoned to have any kind of business connection in India in the form of the entity F. When F was not a dependent agent, in view of Explanation 2, read with proviso to section 9(1)(i), the income of the assessee could not be deemed to accrue or arise in India under section 9(1)(i). The services provided by the assessee to the Indian customers were merely of displaying and storing data of Indian subscribers and such services were limited to the provision of e-commerce platform for advertising of products or services in India. The arrangement between the assessee and the subscribers was for the provision of services for a standard facility and not for “rendering of any technical, managerial or consultancy services” as provided under section 9(1)(vii) read with Explanation 2. No technical services had been provided by the assessee to treat the subscription fees as in the nature of fees for technical services. No questions of law arose. Circular No. 7 of 2003 dated September 5, 2003 ([2003] 263 ITR (St.) 62)  (AY.2011-12)