The assessee, a partnership firm engaged in the business of cutting and polishing diamonds and export thereof, made remittances towards diamond testing and certification services to GIA USA, which operated a laboratory in Hong Kong through GIA Hong Kong. The Assessing Officer held that the payment was made to GIA Hong Kong and not to GIA USA and, therefore, treaty benefit under the India-USA DTAA was not available and tax was deductible at source under section 195. The High Court, however, found that the invoices were issued by GIA USA and the remittances were received in the offshore bank account of GIA USA, and held that though there was only a “take-in window” in Hong Kong where diamonds were delivered, the service arrangement was with GIA USA and the beneficial owner of the remittances was GIA USA. The High Court further held that the diamond grading / certification services did not “make available” any technical knowledge, experience, skill, know-how or process to the assessee and, therefore, the payment could not be characterised as fees for technical services under Art. 12 of the India-USA DTAA; accordingly, no tax was deductible at source under section 195. The Supreme Court dismissed the Revenue’s SLP. (AY. 2015-16).