\u00a0Assessee entered into two agreements with its AE, i.e. technology collaboration and technical assistance agreement and service agreement as regards various services . \u00a0Said agreements were in force till assessment year 2011-12 . \u00a0During\u00a0 year, said agreements were broken into three agreements i.e. trademark license agreement, technology license agreement and IT service delivery agreement . Assessee, in light of IT service delivery agreement, contended that same was a separate and distinct agreement from main royalty agreement (Technology collaboration and technical assistance agreement) and, thus, it did not come under definition of FTS provided under India-Sweden tax treaty . Assessing Officer held that \u00a0IT services rendered by assessee were subservient to royalty agreement and were ancillary and subsidiary to main royalty agreement entered into by both parties . \u00a0The Assessee filed an appeal before the DRP\u00a0 . DRP affirmed the order of the Assessing Officer . On appeal\u00a0 the\u00a0 Tribunal affirmed the order of the Assessing Officer and held that \u00a0services rendered by assessee would be treated as fee for technical services . \u00a0(AY. 2013-14 , \u00a02014-15)<\/p>\n
\u00a0Assessee entered into two agreements with its AE, i.e. technology collaboration and technical assistance agreement and service agreement as regards various services . \u00a0Said agreements were in force till assessment year 2011-12 . \u00a0During\u00a0 year, said agreements were broken into three agreements i.e. trademark license agreement, technology license agreement and IT service delivery agreement . Assessee, in light of IT service delivery agreement, contended that same was a separate and distinct agreement from main royalty agreement (Technology collaboration and technical assistance agreement) and, thus, it did not come under definition of FTS provided under India-Sweden tax treaty . Assessing Officer held that \u00a0IT services rendered by assessee were subservient to royalty agreement and were ancillary and subsidiary to main royalty agreement entered into by both parties . \u00a0The Assessee filed an appeal before the DRP\u00a0 . DRP affirmed the order of the Assessing Officer . On appeal\u00a0 the\u00a0 Tribunal affirmed the order of the Assessing Officer and held that \u00a0services rendered by assessee would be treated as fee for technical services . \u00a0(AY. 2013-14 , \u00a02014-15)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
S. 9(1)(vii):Income deemed to accrue or arise in India – Fees for technical services -Technology collaboration and technical assistance agreement- Assessed as fees for technical services \u2013 DTAA -India \u2013 Sweden [S. 9(1) (vi) , Art , 12 ]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-19279","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-50X","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19279","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=19279"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19279\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":19280,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19279\/revisions\/19280"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=19279"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=19279"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=19279"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}