R U L I N G (By Mr. A. Sinha )
|
|
- Jennifer Osborne
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 BEFORE THE AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS (INCOME-TAX) NEW DELHI Wednesday, the 30 th Day of April, 2008 P R E S E N T Mr. Justice P.V. Reddi (Chairman) Mr. A. Sinha (Member) Mr. Rao Ranvijay Singh (Member) AAR No. 744 of 2007 Name of the applicant and : Address KnoWerX Education(India) Private Limited, C-1, Avon Plaza-1, Thakur Complex, Kandivli (East) Mumbai Commissioner concerned : DIT (International taxation), Mumbai Present for the Applicant : Mr. Ravindra Kumar Tulsyan, Director Present for the Department : Mr. Parag A.Vyas, Advocate R U L I N G (By Mr. A. Sinha ) M/s KnoWerX Education (India) Private Limited, states in its application that it is engaged in promoting professional examinations/certification programmes of foreign institutes, societies, professional bodies, etc., of international repute, which do not have any establishment of their own in India. In the course of this activity, the applicant has signed an agreement with the American Production and Inventory Control Society, Inc. (APICS) which is a non-profit making body, and offers three certification programmes, namely, CPIM, CIRM and 1
2 CSCP. The applicant is in the process of signing another agreement with the American Society of Transportation and Logistics Inc. (AST&L) which is also a non-profit making body and offers its own certification programme known as CTL programme. The applicant intends to sign similar agreements in future with other foreign entities. Apart from this, the applicant carries on other activities as well, such as, corporate training, open public training, management consultancy, publishing and trading in educational material, etc. So far as promotion of professional examination/certification programmes of foreign entities is concerned, the applicant will act as their agent; it will collect registration forms and fees from the individuals in India, who wish to register themselves for the examination; and pass them on to the foreign entity after deducting its administrative cost and commission. The foreign entity will conduct examinations either through the applicant or through other entities in India. The evaluation of answer sheets and award of certificates will be done by those foreign entities and they will send certificates to the applicant for local distribution to the successful candidates. In the light of above mentioned facts, the applicant has sought advance ruling of this Authority in respect of APICS and AST&L on the following question:- Do we need to deduct any TDS or do we need to pay any income-tax on examination fees collected by us from individuals in India and remitted to APICS/AST&L on behalf of individuals in India? If yes, at what rate? What will be this 2
3 categorised as: Royalty, Included Services, Education, Business Profit, or something else? 2. As the question framed by the applicant was not happily worded, we have recast the same as follows:- Q.1 a) Whether the examination fee collected by the applicant on behalf of two professional organizations in USA, namely, APICS and AST&L and remitted to those two organizations is liable to be treated as the income of the said entities liable to be taxed in India? b) If the answer is in affirmative, how that income has to be classified such as business income, income from royalty, technical services? Q.2 Whether the applicant has a legal obligation to deduct tax at source in relation thereto under the relevant provisions of Income-tax Act, 1961 and if so at what rate? 3. The applicant s case is that APICS and AST&L are exempt from income-tax in USA. If any taxes are deducted at source in India out of the examination fees paid to them, they would not be able to get any offset under the agreement for avoidance of double taxation between India and USA (DTAA). As such, no deduction of tax at source should be made under the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) on such income. 4. The Commissioner of Income-tax, Mumbai in his initial comments, stated that as APICS & AST&L were not tax residents of USA, they could not avail tax benefits under the DTAA. The income by way of examination fees would be taxable in India as per the provisions of the domestic law. 3
4 This income will be in the nature of business income which would accrue or arise in India. As such, tax shall be liable to be deducted at source under section 195(1) of the Act. 5. During the course of hearing, the applicant filed an affidavit stating some additional facts in relation to its business activities, which had not been specifically mentioned in the application, especially more details about the procedure adopted for receiving applications and sending fees to the US entities. The applicant also filed some more documents with regard to the liability of APICS and AST&L to pay tax under the US law. 6. Along with the application, the applicant has filed the agreement dated which it has entered into with APICS. The recital to the said agreement, inter alia, states that the parties are desirous of entering into a business relationship to promote certification examinations, promote, resell, re-print and distribute the licensed products of APICS and exchange information with APICS. A copy of the detailed terms and conditions are annexed to the agreement. Paragraph 1 of the agreement states that the provisions of articles 3, 4,5 and 6 of the terms and conditions alone shall apply to the parties. Article 3 of the agreement deals with allied organization, memberships and membership activities. Article 4 is about distribution of the licensed products of APICS by the applicant. Article 5 is regarding reprinting of the licensed products of APICS. These articles are not relevant for the present consideration as the question on which the 4
5 applicant has sought ruling of this Authority relates to its activities as exam promoter. This expression has been defined in article 1.9 of the terms and conditions, according to which the role of the exam promoter is to promote professional/certification examinations at the local level. Para 6 of the terms and conditions sets out the detailed provision in this regard. It is seen from this paragraph that the exam promoter shall have a nonexclusive right to promote such examinations in a particular local area. It is to be noted that APICS reserves the right to host, promote, advertise and market the professional/certification examinations within that local area on its own or in association with a third party. The exam promoter shall be free to decide the manner in which it will carry out the promotional and marketing activities. However, APICS shall have right to reject any promotional and marketing material, which is disparaging to or adversely affects it. The exam promoter shall collect duly filled in registration forms from the candidates and forward the same along with fees to APICS. The details of fees have been specified in Appendix-2. As per this appendix, the applicant will remit a fee of US$120 per candidate for CPIM examinations and a fee of US$ 160 for CIRM examinations to APICS. This remittance will be done in US dollars. The exam promoter will also collect and retain equivalent of US$ 90 in Indian currency for CPIM examination and US$ 67 for CIRM examination. No fee for CSCP examination has been provided in the agreement. In addition to the above functions, the 5
6 exam promoter shall also help APICS in selecting appropriate places where the examinations will be conducted. The examination will, however, be conducted by another entity called exam administrator. 7. Mr. R.K. Tulsyan, Director of the applicant company, has further clarified about these activities in the course of hearing. Interested individuals fill up forms, giving their personal particulars, specifying the examination they want to take, fee details, etc., and deposit such forms along with applicable fees with the applicant. The applicant forwards these to APICS. One to two weeks before the examination date, APICS sends examination confirmation notices to the applicant who couriers them to the candidates. APICS has entered into separate agreements for the purpose of holding examinations with management institutes, like Thakur Institute of Management and Research, Mumbai, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, Loyola Institute of Business Administration, Chennai, etc. The examination papers are sent by APICS to the above named institutes. After the examination is over, those institutes send question papers along with answer sheets direct to APICS. The score reports then come to the applicant for distribution to the candidates. 8. The applicant has also filed a copy of the draft agreement which it is negotiating with AST&L. According to this, AST&L would grant exclusive right for three years to the applicant to operate Certification in Transportation and Logistics (CTL) Programme in India. Under this 6
7 arrangement the applicant will also be responsible for the conduct of examination in India. Evaluation of examination papers and grant of certificates will, however, be the responsibility of AST&L which will send certificates to the applicant for distribution amongst successful candidates in India. AST&L will charge a fee of US$ 90 from each candidate for taking the examination, US $ 60 for re-taking examination, and US $ 40 for exam waiver. Mr. R.K. Tulsyan has further clarified that the individuals proposing to take the certification examination will submit forms giving their personal details, fee details etc., to the applicant who will forward the same to AST&L which, in turn, will confirm the registration of the individuals. The question papers will be sent by AST&L to the applicant who will forward it to the invigilators who, in turn, will send the answer sheets back to the applicant. The applicant will forward it to AST&L. The applicant shall collect the examination fees in Indian currency and remit the same to AST&L after conduct of the examination. 9. In the light of the above facts, we may proceed to determine the liability of APICS & AST&L to pay taxes in India in relation to the examination fees payable to them, on which the questions posed to us depend. Section 5 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ( the Act ) specifies the scope of total income. Sub-section(2) of this section, which applies to nonresidents, reads as follows:- 7
8 5. Scope of total income. (1) x x x x x (2) Subject to the provisions of this Act, the total income of any previous year of a person who is a non-resident includes all income from whatever source derived which- (a) (b) is received or is deemed to be received in India in such year by or on behalf of such person; or accrues or arises or is deemed to accrue or arise to him in India during such year. It is seen from the above that the total income of a non-resident includes all income received or deemed to be received in India by him or on his behalf. It also includes income, which accrues or arises or is deemed to accrue or arise to him in India. Accrue, arise and is received are three distinct expressions used in this sub-section. So far as receipt of income is concerned, there can be no difficulty; it conveys a clear and distinct meaning. The expressions, accrue and arise, though these do not mean exactly the same thing, but have been used in the Act to denote the same idea in contradistinction to the word receive. The expressions, accrue or arise do not mean actual receipt of income, but indicate a stage anterior to the point of time when the income has become receivable. They indicate that the assessee has acquired the right to receive the income, though it may be received by him later. On the other hand, income is said to be received when it reaches the assessee (see CIT 8
9 v. Ahmedbhai Umarbhai & Co. 1, CIT v. Ashokbhai Chimanbhai 2 and Seth Pushalal Mansinghka (P.) Ltd. v. CIT 3 ). It is nobody s case here that income accrues or arises or is deemed to accrue or arise in India. The facts of the case are clear in this regard. The income in the form of examination fees is received in India by the applicant and remitted to the non-resident entity abroad. The said income is undisputedly business income. There is no controversy about the nature of this income. 10. It is further seen that clause(a) of sub-section(2) of section 5 of the Act not only includes income received by the assessee himself, but also income received on his behalf. The expression on behalf of has a clear meaning which does not admit of any doubt. According to the New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary, this expression means as the agent or representative of another; in the name of. We have already noticed that the applicant collects a specified amount of fee from each candidate for APICS and transmits the same to that entity. Paragraphs (D) and (E) of clause (6.2), read with Appendix 2 of the agreement, are relevant in this regard. Similarly, in the case of AST&L, as per the draft agreement, the applicant is required to collect examination fees from the candidates on behalf of that entity and send it to that entity. At this juncture, we may refer to a decided case on the subject of receipt of income in India on 1 18 ITR 472 (SC) 2 56 ITR 42(SC) 3 66 ITR 159 (SC) 9
10 behalf of the non-resident assessee. In the case of Turner Morrison & Co. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax 4 a certain company manufactured salt in Egypt and sent the same to Turner Morrison & Co. Ltd, their agents in India, for sale. Turner Morrison & Co. Ltd, inter alia, collected sale proceeds in India and after deducting their expenses and commission, remitted the balance amount to the non-resident company in Egypt. A question arose for determination whether Turner Morrison & Co. Ltd received the sale proceeds in India on behalf of the non-resident company. A plea was raised that Turner Morrison & Co. Ltd were nothing but an animated post office. Rejecting the plea, the Supreme Court observed that Turner Morrison & Co. Ltd did not merely mechanically collect and transmit the sale proceeds, but were rather entrusted with important duties on behalf of the non-resident company, namely, handling cargoes, selling goods sent to them, issuing delivery orders, collecting sale proceeds and remitting the same after deducting their expenses. As such, Turner Morrison & Co. Ltd received the sale proceeds in India on behalf of the non-resident company. We find that the present case is similar to the aforesaid case in material particulars. Here also the applicant does not merely act mechanically in collecting and transmitting examination fees, or acts as a mere conduit, but it performs a number of important functions for APICS by promoting and advertising their examinations in India, collecting 4 23 ITR
11 filled in registration forms and fees from candidates, assisting APICS in selecting suitable places for conducting examinations, etc. Thus there cannot be any doubt that the applicant receives income in India on behalf of the APICS as their agent. Similar will be the position in respect of AST&L. 11. Looked purely from the perspective of sections 4 and 5 of the Act, the examination fees collected on behalf of APICS and AST&L would be taxable under the Act. But there is an agreement with USA on avoidance of double taxation. We have to also see the impact of this agreement on the tax liability of APICS and AST&L. 12. This takes us to the DTAA between Government of the United States of America and the Government of Republic of India. The applicant stated in the application that APICS and AST&L were non-profit making professional organizations and had been determined by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Department of Treasury, USA as tax exempt organizations. The applicant also annexed a photocopy of a letter from the IRS and print-outs from the website, namely, in support of its claim. The Commissioner in his comments took the stand that since APICS and AST&L were tax exempt organizations, they could not be regarded as tax residents of USA, and as such, the treaty provisions would not apply to them. He relied on the provisions of article 1 11
12 and 4 of the DTAA for this proposition. The relevant provisions of article 1, as contained in paragraphs 1 and 2 thereof are extracted below:- Article 1: General Scope 1. This Convention shall apply to persons who are residents of one or both of the Contracting States, except as otherwise provided in the Convention. 2. The Convention shall not restrict in any manner any exclusion, exemption, deduction, credit, or other allowance now or hereafter accorded: (a) by the laws of either Contracting State; or (b) by any other agreement between the Contracting States. Paragraph 1 of article 4 reads as follows:- Article 4 : Residence 1. For the purposes of this Convention, the term resident of a Contracting State means any person who, under the laws of that State is liable to tax therein by reason of his domicile, residence, citizenship, place of management, place of incorporation, or any other criterion of a similar nature, provided however, that (a) (b) this term does not include any person who is liable to tax in that State in respect only of income from sources in that State; and in the case of income derived or paid by a partnership, estate, or trust, this term applies only to the extent that the income derived by such partnership, estate, or trust is subject to tax in that State as the income of a resident, either in its hands or in the hands of its partners or beneficiaries. It would be seen from the above that the provisions of the DTAA are applicable only to the residents of India and USA. The expression 12
13 resident has been defined to mean a person liable to pay tax by reason of, inter alia, place of incorporation. Clause (b) of paragraph 1 of article 4 specifically mentions that a partnership, an estate, or a trust, shall be regarded as resident only if it is a taxable entity in that state, or if the beneficiaries who derive the income are liable to pay tax thereon. According to the Commissioner, partnerships, trusts, etc., are regarded as transparent entities in USA, and these are not liable to pay tax there. This point was also highlighted during the arguments by Mr. Parag A.Vyas, the learned counsel for the Revenue. As some doubt arose with regard to the residential status of APICS and AST&L under the DTAA, the applicant filed some additional documents to clarify this point. These include determination letters of the IRS in respect of APICS and AST&L respectively. The applicant also filed written submissions on the point. It emerged during the subsequent arguments that both APICS and AST&L are corporations incorporated in USA. As such, these are not transparent entities and are liable to pay federal income-tax in USA. But these have been exempted from payment of tax under section 501 (c) (6) under the Internal Revenue Code (IRC), by virtue of their belonging to certain specified categories indicated in the above provision. Such an exemption is permissible under paragraph 2 of article 1 of the DTAA. This makes it clear that APICS and AST&L are tax residents of USA and the provision of the DTAA would be attracted in this case. 13
14 13. Having realized this, the learned counsel for the Revenue advanced two new pleas. He first contended that the applicant constituted business connection in India for APICS. Since APICS earned examination fees through this business connection, the same would be chargeable to tax in India in terms of section 9 of the Act. We think otherwise. We have already observed above that the income in question is actually received in India as per sub-section (2)(a) of Section 5, instead of accruing or arising or deemed to accrue or arise in India. As such, section 9 would not be attracted and the question of business connection would not arise. 14. Mr. Parag A. Vyas, the learned counsel for the Revenue, then stated that the applicant should be treated as permanent establishment of APICS. Thus the income earned by APICS in the form of examination fee would be taxable in India in view of the stipulation contained in paragraph 1 of article 7 of the DTAA, which reads :- Article 7 Business Profits (1) The profits of an enterprise of a Contracting State shall be taxable only in that State unless the enterprise carries on business in the other Contracting State through a permanent establishment situated therein. If the enterprise carries on business as aforesaid, the profits of the enterprise may be taxed in the other State but only so much of them as is attributable to (a) that permanent establishment; (b) sales in the other State of goods or merchandise of the same or similar kind as those sold through that permanent establishment; or (c) other business activities carried on in the other State of the same or similar kind as those effected through that permanent establishment. 14
15 (2) to (7) x x x x x x x The expression permanent establishment has been defined in article 5 of the DTAA, the relevant provisions of which read as under:- Article 5 Permanent establishment 1. For the purposes of this Convention, the term permanent establishment means a fixed place of business through which the business of an enterprise is wholly or partly carried on. 2. The term permanent establishment includes especially : (a) a place of management ; (b) a branch ; (c) an office ; (d) a factory ; (e) a workshop ; (f) a mine, an oil or gas well, a quarry, or any other place of extraction of natural resources ; (g) a warehouse, in relation to a person providing storage facilities for others ; (h) a farm, plantation or other place where agriculture, forestry, plantation or related activities are carried on ; (i) a store or premises used as a sales outlet ; (j) an installation or structure used for the exploration or exploitation of natural resources, but only if so used for a period of more than 120 days in any twelve-month period ; (k) a building site or construction, installation or assembly project or supervisory activities in connection therewith, where such site, project or activities (together with other such sites, projects or activities, if any) continue for a period of more than 120 days in any twelve-month period ; (l) the furnishing of services, other than included services as defined in article 12 (royalties and fees for included services), within a Contracting State by an enterprise through employees or other personnel, but only if: (i) activities of that nature continue within that State for a period or periods aggregating more than 90 days within any twelve-month period ; or 15
16 (ii) the services are performed within that State for a related enterprise [within the meaning of paragraph 1 of Article 9 (associated enterprises)]. 3. Notwithstanding the preceding provisions of this article, the term permanent establishment shall be deemed not to include any one or more of the following : (a) the use of facilities solely for the purpose of storage, display, or occasional delivery of goods or merchandise belonging to the enterprise ; (b) the maintenance of a stock of goods or merchandise belonging to the enterprise solely for the purpose of storage, display, or occasional delivery ; (c) the maintenance of a stock of goods or merchandise belonging to the enterprise solely for the purpose of processing by another enterprise ; (d) the maintenance of a fixed place of business solely for the purpose of purchasing goods or merchandise, or of collecting information, for the enterprise ; (e) the maintenance of a fixed place of business solely for the purpose of advertising, for the supply of information, for scientific research or for other activities which have a preparatory or auxiliary character, for the enterprise 4. Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraphs 1 and 2, where a person- other than an agent of an independent status to whom paragraph 5 applies is acting in a Contracting State on behalf of an enterprise of the other Contracting State, that enterprise shall be deemed to have a permanent establishment in the first mentioned State, if: (a) he has and habitually exercises in the first-mentioned State an authority to conclude contracts on behalf of the enterprise, unless his activities are limited to those mentioned in paragraph 3 which, if exercised through a fixed place of business, would not make that fixed place of business a permanent establishment under the provisions of that paragraph; (b) he has no such authority but habitually maintains in the first-mentioned State a stock of goods or merchandise 16
17 from which he regularly delivers goods or merchandise on behalf of the enterprise, and some additional activities conducted in that State on behalf of the enterprise have contributed to the sale of the goods or merchandise; or (c) he habitually secures orders in the first-mentioned State, wholly or almost wholly for the enterprise. 5. An enterprise of a Contracting State shall not be deemed to have a permanent establishment in the other Contracting State merely because it carries on business in that other State through a broker, general commission agent, or any other agent of an independent status, provided that such persons are acting in the ordinary course of their business. However, when the activities of such an agent are devoted wholly or almost wholly on behalf of that enterprise and the transactions between the agent and the enterprise are not made under arm s length conditions, he shall not be considered an agent of independent status within the meaning of this paragraph. 6. x x x x x Permanent establishment has been defined in paragraph 1 of article 5 to mean a fixed place of business through which the business of an enterprise is wholly or partly carried on. Paragraph 2 specifies certain types of permanent establishments. Paragraph 3 clarifies what shall not constitute permanent establishment. We are not concerned here with paragraphs 2 and 3 as the applicant is not a part of APICS or AST&L. Paragraph 4 and 5 are relevant for our consideration. These deal with what is known as agency permanent establishments. According to these provisions, where an enterprise of a state carries on business in another state through an agent, the agent will constitute permanent establishment 17
18 of the enterprise depending on the fact whether it is a dependent agent or an independent agent and some other factors. As per paragraph 4, if the agent does not have independent status and habitually concludes contract or maintains stock of goods and merchandise and delivers them, on behalf of the enterprise, that agent shall be treated as a permanent establishment of the enterprise. So also will be the case where the agent habitually secures orders wholly or almost wholly for the enterprise. What follows from this is that it is not enough for an enterprise to merely have a dependent agent in the other contracting state, but that agent should also have authority to bind the enterprise in its business activities in that other state. It is only then that the dependent agent shall be treated as the permanent establishment of the enterprise. On the other hand, if the agent is a broker, general commission agent or any other agent of independent status and is acting in the ordinary course of its business, then as per paragraph 5, it will not be regarded as a permanent establishment of the enterprise. This position will, however, change if the activities of the independent agent are devoted wholly or almost wholly to that enterprise and the transaction between the two are not at arm s length. In that case, the independent agent will be treated as a permanent establishment of the enterprise. 15. We find that the applicant is not a part of APICS. It does not conclude any contracts on behalf of APICS. The acceptance of 18
19 candidature of an individual for a certification examination is solely done by APICS. The applicant does not maintain stock of goods or merchandise belonging to APICS, it does not secure orders wholly or almost wholly for APICS and it does not in any way bind APICS in the conduct of latter s examination programme in India. Similar will be the position in respect of AST&L. The applicant thus cannot be regarded as a dependent agent of APICS or AST&L under paragraph 4 of article 5. It is seen that the applicant enjoys an independent status. As stated by the applicant, there is no financial, managerial or any other type of participation between it and APICS. It carries on a variety of activities as noted above, besides promoting examinations of APICS and AST&L. So far as promotion of examination is concerned, it has engaged itself into business relationship with APICS, is in the process of forging such relationship with AST&L, and is open to having such relationship with other foreign entities. Thus, in respect of this activity too, the applicant is not wholly or substantially devoted to APICS and AST&L only. The applicant appears to carry on the work of examination promoter in the ordinary course of its business. The applicant is not subject to any control of APICS with regard to the manner in which it shall carry out its activities with regard to promotion of the certificate examination. We are thus of the view that in terms of paragraph 5 of article 5 the applicant cannot be deemed to be a permanent establishment of APICS and /or AST&L in India. 19
20 16. So far as deduction of tax at source is concerned, we may first refer to the provisions of section 4 and the general scheme of Chapter XVII, before coming to section 195. Sub-section(1) of section 4 is the charging provision. Sub-section(2) of this section says that in respect of income chargeable under sub-section(1), income-tax shall be deducted at source or paid in advance. Coming to Chapter XVII, it deals with collection and recovery of tax. Section 190 states that notwithstanding regular assessment later, tax on such income shall be payable by deduction at source or by advance payment. Various sections of Chapter XVII deal with deduction of tax at source in relation to different types of income. We are presently concerned with section 195. This section requires that any person who is paying any sum chargeable under the Act, inter alia, to a foreign company shall at the time of making payment deduct income-tax thereon at the applicable rates. As we have seen, the requirement of the Act is that taxes are to be deducted at source from incomes chargeable under the Act. Where the income is not chargeable to tax, the question of any deduction at source would also not arise. Since we have held in the present case that no tax is attracted on payment of examination fees being made to APICS & AST&L by virtue of paragraph 1 of article 7 of the DTAA, it stands to reason that no deduction of taxes need be made from such payments. 20
21 17. In the light of the foregoing discussion, we rule that the applicant is not required to either deduct any income-tax or to pay any such tax on the examination fees collected by it for APICS and AST&L and remitted to them as the same is not taxable in India. Accordingly, part (a) of question no. 1 is answered in the negative. As regards part (b) of the said question, the nature of income is business income. Question No. 2 is also answered in the negative. Ruling pronounced in the open Court of the Authority on this 30 th day of April, Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- (A. SINHA) ( P.V. REDDI) (RAO RANVIJAY SINGH) MEMBER CHAIRMAN MEMBER F.No. AAR/744/2007/ Dated: This copy is certified to be a true copy of the advance ruling and is sent to: 1. The Applicant. 2. The DIT (International Taxation), Mumbai 3. The Joint Secretary (FT &TR-I), M/o Finance, CBDT, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi 4. The Joint Secretary (FT &TR-II), M/o Finance, CBDT, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi 5. Guard File. (Batsala Jha Yadav) Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax (AAR) 21
Double Taxation Agreement between India and Bangladesh
Double Taxation Agreement between India and Bangladesh Signed on May 27, 1992 This document was downloaded from the Dezan Shira & Associates Online Library and was compiled by the tax experts at Dezan
More informationUK/KENYA DOUBLE TAXATION AGREEMENT SIGNED 31 JULY 1973 Amended by a Protocol signed 20 January 1976 and notes dated 8 February 1977
UK/KENYA DOUBLE TAXATION AGREEMENT SIGNED 31 JULY 1973 Amended by a Protocol signed 20 January 1976 and notes dated 8 February 1977 Entered into force 30 September 1977 Effective in United Kingdom from
More information2005 Income and Capital Gains Tax Convention and Notes
2005 Income and Capital Gains Tax Convention and Notes Treaty Partners: Botswana; United Kingdom Signed: September 9, 2005 In Force: September 4, 2006 Effective: In Botswana, from July 1, 2007. In the
More informationNOTIFICATION NO.35/2014 [F.NO.503/11/2005 FTD II], DATED
SECTION 90 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 DOUBLE TAXATION AGREEMENT AGREEMENT FOR AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND PREVENTION OF FISCAL EVASION WITH FOREIGN COUNTRIES FIJI NOTIFICATION NO.35/2014 [F.NO.503/11/2005
More informationCONVENTION BETWEEN IRELAND AND THE REPUBLIC OF GHANA FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND THE PREVENTION OF FISCAL EVASION WITH RESPECT TO TAXES
CONVENTION BETWEEN IRELAND AND THE REPUBLIC OF GHANA FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND THE PREVENTION OF FISCAL EVASION WITH RESPECT TO TAXES ON INCOME AND CAPITAL GAINS The Government of Ireland
More informationAgreement for avoidance of double taxation of income with USA Whereas the annexed Convention between the Government of the United States of America
Agreement for avoidance of double taxation of income with USA Whereas the annexed Convention between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Republic of India for the avoidance
More informationUK/IRELAND INCOME AND CAPITAL GAINS TAX CONVENTION Signed June 2, Entered into force 23 December 1976
UK/IRELAND INCOME AND CAPITAL GAINS TAX CONVENTION Signed June 2, 1976 Entered into force 23 December 1976 Effective in the UK for: i) Income Tax (other than Income Tax on salaries, wages, remuneration
More informationCyprus Kuwait Tax Treaties
Cyprus Kuwait Tax Treaties AGREEMENT OF 15 TH DECEMBER, 1984 This is a Convention between the Republic of Cyprus and the Government of the State of Kuwait for the avoidance of double taxation and the prevention
More information1980 Income and Capital Gains Tax Convention
1980 Income and Capital Gains Tax Convention Treaty Partners: Gambia; United Kingdom Signed: May 20, 1980 In Force: July 5, 1982 Effective: In Gambia, from January 1, 1980. In the U.K.: income tax and
More information1968 Income Tax Convention
1968 Income Tax Convention Treaty Partners: Uganda; Zambia Signed: August 24, 1968 Effective: In Uganda, from January 1, 1964. In Zambia, from April 1, 1964. See Article XX. Status: In Force CONVENTION
More information(US Thailand Double Taxation Treaty) The Government of the Kingdom of Thailand and the Government of the United States of America,
CONVENTION BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM OF THAILAND AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND THE PREVENTION OF FISCAL EVASION WITH RESPECT TO
More informationTaxation of Permanent Establishment
Taxation of Permanent Establishment Permanent Establishment or PE is an important concept under Tax treaties. Multi National Corporations & Non- Residents carrying on Business is another country are liable
More informationArticle 1 Persons covered. This Convention shall apply to persons who are residents of one or both of the Contracting States. Article 2 Taxes covered
Signed on 12.06.2006 Entered into force on 07.11.207 Effective from 01.01.2008 CONVENTION BETWEEN THE REPUBLIC OF ARMENIA AND THE SWISS CONFEDERATION FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION WITH RESPECT TO
More informationTHE INCOME TAX ACT. Regulations made by the Minister under section 76 of the Income Tax Act
Government Notice No. 9 of 2004 THE INCOME TAX ACT Regulations made by the Minister under section 76 of the Income Tax Act 1. These regulations may be cited as the Double Taxation Convention (Republic
More informationR U L I N G [By Hon ble Chairman]
BEFORE THE AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS(INCOME TAX), NEW DELHI 30 th Day of March, 2009 PRESENT Mr Justice. P.V. Reddi (Chairman) Mr. A. Sinha (Member) Mr. Rao Ranvijay Singh (Member) A.A.R. No. 749 of
More informationDouble Taxation Avoidance Agreement between Taiwan and Singapore
Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between Taiwan and Singapore Entered into force on May 14, 1982 This document was downloaded from ASEAN Briefing (www.aseanbriefing.com) and was compiled by the tax
More informationNOTIFICATION NO. 7/2013 [F. NO. 506/123/84-FTD-II], DATED
SECTION 90 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 - DOUBLE TAXATION AGREEMENT - AGREEMENT FOR AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND PREVENTION OF FISCAL EVASION WITH FOREIGN COUNTRIES - MALAYSIA NOTIFICATION NO. 7/2013
More informationS.R.Dinodia & Co.
Galileo International Vs. DCIT By Pradeep Dinodia LL.B., FCA S.R.Dinodia & Co. http://www.srdinodia.com FACTS OF THE CASE 1. Galileo International Inc. (the 'Appellant'), a resident of USA, is in the business
More information1993 Income and Capital Gains Tax Convention
1993 Income and Capital Gains Tax Convention Treaty Partners: Ghana; United Kingdom Signed: January 20, 1993 In Force: August 10, 1994 Effective: In Ghana, from January 1, 1995. In the U.K.: income tax
More informationCONVENTION BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF CYPRUS
CONVENTION BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF CYPRUS FOR THE ELIMINATION OF DOUBLE TAXATION WITH RESPECT TO TAXES ON
More informationCyprus Romania Tax Treaties
Cyprus Romania Tax Treaties AGREEMENT OF 16 TH NOVEMBER, 1981 This is the Convention between the Government of The Socialist Republic of Romania and the Government of the Republic of Cyprus for the avoidance
More informationA G R E E M E N T BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA AND THE SWISS FEDERAL COUNCIL
A G R E E M E N T BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA AND THE SWISS FEDERAL COUNCIL FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION WITH RESPECT TO TAXES ON INCOME AND ON CAPITAL The Government of the
More informationCONVENTION. between THE GOVERNMENT OF BARBADOS. and THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF GHANA
CONVENTION between THE GOVERNMENT OF BARBADOS and THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF GHANA FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND THE PREVENTION OF FISCAL EVASION WITH RESPECT TO TAXES ON INCOME AND ON
More informationDouble Taxation Agreement between China and the United States of America
Double Taxation Agreement between China and the United States of America English Version Done on April 30, 1984 This document was downloaded from the Dezan Shira & Associates Online Library and was compiled
More informationTHE GOVERNMENT OF CANADA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDIA,
Agreement Between the Government of Canada and the Government of the Republic of India for the Avoidance of Double Taxation and the Prevention of Fiscal Evasion with Respect to Taxes on Income and on Capital
More informationSYNTHESISED TEXT THE MLI AND THE CONVENTION BETWEEN JAPAN AND THE CZECHOSLOVAK SOCIALIST
SYNTHESISED TEXT OF THE MLI AND THE CONVENTION BETWEEN JAPAN AND THE CZECHOSLOVAK SOCIALIST REPUBLIC FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION WITH RESPECT TO TAXES ON INCOME (AS IT APPLIES TO RELATIONS BETWEEN
More informationbetween the Swiss Confederation and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan for the Avoidance of Double Taxation with respect to Taxes on Income
Convention between the Swiss Confederation and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan for the Avoidance of Double Taxation with respect to Taxes on Income The Swiss Federal Council and the Government of the
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Judgment delivered on: W.P.(C) 2384/2013 & CM 4515/2013. versus
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 16.05.2016 + W.P.(C) 2384/2013 & CM 4515/2013 ADOBE SYSTEMS INCORPORATED... Petitioner Through: Mr R.P. Bhat, Senior Advocate with Mr Prakash
More informationCyprus United Kingdom Tax Treaties
Cyprus United Kingdom Tax Treaties AGREEMENT OF 20 TH JUNE, 1974 - AS AMENDED BY PROTOCOL, 2 ND APRIL 1980 This is the Convention between the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern
More informationKenya Gazette Supplement No th July, (Legislative Supplement No. 57)
SPECIAL ISSUE 1769 Kenya Gazette Supplement No. 115 28th July, 2017 LEGAL NOTICE NO. 147 (Legislative Supplement No. 57) THE INCOME TAX ACT (Cap. 470) AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF
More informationDouble Taxation Relief (India) Order 1986 (SR 1986/336)
Reprint as at 7 October 1999 Double Taxation Relief (India) Order 1986 (SR 1986/336) Paul Reeves, Governor-General Order in Council At Wellington this 24th day of November 1986 Present: His Excellency
More informationAGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM OF THAILAND AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM OF THAILAND AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION OF THE PEOPLE S REPUBLIC OF CHINA FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND
More information2005 Income and Capital Gains Tax Convention
2005 Income and Capital Gains Tax Convention Treaty Partners: Barbados; Botswana Signed: February 23, 2005 In Force: August 25, 2005 Effective: In Barbados, from January 1, 2006. In Botswana, from July
More informationHungary - Singapore Income Tax Treaty (1997)
Hungary - Singapore Income Tax Treaty (1997) Status: In Force Conclusion Date: 17 April 1997. Entry into Force: 18 December 1998. Effective Date: 1 January 1999 (see Article 29). AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
More informationCyprus United States of America Double Tax Treaty
Cyprus United States of America Double Tax Treaty AGREEMENT OF 19 TH MARCH, 1984 This is the Convention between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Republic of Cyprus
More informationAGREEMENT OF 28 TH MAY, Moldova
AGREEMENT OF 28 TH MAY, 2009 Moldova CONVENTION BETWEEN IRELAND AND THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND THE PREVENTION OF FISCAL EVASION WITH RESPECT TO TAXES ON INCOME Ireland
More informationC O N V E N T I O N BETWEEN THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA AND THE CZECH REPUBLIC
C O N V E N T I O N BETWEEN THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA AND THE CZECH REPUBLIC FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND THE PREVENTION OF FISCAL EVASION WITH RESPECT TO TAXES ON INCOME AND ON PROPERTY The
More informationConvention between Canada and the Republic of Chile for the Avoidance of Double Taxation and the...
Page 1 of 11 Français Contact Us Help Search Canada site Home What's New Site Map Glossary HotLinks About Us FAQ Media Room Publications Legislation - Notices of Tax Treaty Developments - Status of Tax
More informationBEFORE THE AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS (INCOME-TAX) NEW DELHI P R E S E N T. AAR No. 746 of 2007
BEFORE THE AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS (INCOME-TAX) NEW DELHI P R E S E N T Thursday, the 11 th Day of September, 2008 Mr. Justice P.V. Reddi (Chairman) Mr. A. Sinha (Member) Mr. Rao Ranvijay Singh (Member)
More informationDesiring to conclude an Agreement for the avoidance of double taxation and the prevention of fiscal evasion with respect to taxes on income,
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION OF THE PEOPLE S REPUBLIC OF CHINA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF VIETNAM FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION
More informationThe Government of Japan and the Government of the United States of America,
CONVENTION BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF JAPAN AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND THE PREVENTION OF FISCAL EVASION WITH RESPECT TO TAXES ON INCOME The
More informationPoland - Sri Lanka Income and Capital Tax Treaty (1980)
Page 1 of 9 Poland - Sri Lanka Income and Capital Tax Treaty (1980) Status: In Force Conclusion Date: 25 April 1980. Entry into Force: 21 October 1983. Effective Date: 1 January 1983 (see Article 24).
More informationCONVENTION BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF IRELAND AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM OF THAILAND FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND
CONVENTION BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF IRELAND AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM OF THAILAND FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND THE PREVENTION OF FISCAL EVASION WITH RESPECT TO TAXES ON INCOME AND
More informationCyprus South Africa Tax Treaties
Cyprus South Africa Tax Treaties AGREEMENT OF 26 TH NOVEMBER, 1997 This is the Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Cyprus and the Government of the Republic of South Africa for the avoidance
More informationARTICLE 2 Taxes Covered
CONVENTION BETWEEN THE KINGDOM OF THAILAND AND CANADA FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND THE PREVENTION OF FISCAL EVASION WITH RESPECT TO TAXES ON INCOME The Government of the Kingdom of Thailand
More informationUNITED STATES MODEL INCOME TAX CONVENTION OF NOVEMBER 15, 2006
UNITED STATES MODEL INCOME TAX CONVENTION OF NOVEMBER 15, 2006 CONVENTION BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF ------- FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND THE
More informationThe Swiss Federal Council and the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People s Republic of China,
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE SWISS FEDERAL COUNCIL AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION OF THE PEOPLE S REPUBLIC OF CHINA FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION WITH RESPECT TO TAXES
More informationARMENIA ARTICLE 3 GENERAL DEFINITIONS
ARMENIA Agreement for Avoidance of Double Taxation and prevention of fiscal evasion with Armenia Whereas the annexed Convention between the Government of the Republic of India and the Government of the
More information2004 Income and Capital Gains Tax Agreement
2004 Income and Capital Gains Tax Agreement Treaty Partners: Botswana; Seychelles Signed: August 26, 2004 In Force: June 22, 2005 Effective: In Botswana, from July 1, 2006. In Seychelles, from January
More informationCyprus Croatia Tax Treaties
Cyprus Croatia Tax Treaties AGREEMENT OF 29 TH JUNE, 1985 This is a Convention between the Republic of Cyprus and the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia for the avoidance of double taxation with
More informationJAPAN-BRAZIL CONVENTION
JAPAN-BRAZIL CONVENTION Date of Conclusion: 24 January 1967 Effective Date: 1 January 1968 Decree signed in 14 December 1967 CONVENTION BETWEEN THE FEDERATIVE REPUBLIC OF BRAZIL AND JAPAN FOR THE AVOIDANCE
More informationArticle 3 1. For the purposes of this Convention, unless the context otherwise requires: (a) the term Kazakhstan means the Republic of Kazakhstan,
CONVENTION BETWEEN JAPAN AND THE REPUBLIC OF KAZAKHSTAN FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND THE PREVENTION OF FISCAL EVASION WITH RESPECT TO TAXES ON INCOME Japan and the Republic of Kazakhstan, Desiring
More informationDouble Taxation Avoidance Agreement between Sri Lanka and Singapore
Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between Sri Lanka and Singapore Entered into force on February 1, 1980 This document was downloaded from ASEAN Briefing (www.aseanbriefing.com) and was compiled by the
More informationGOVERNMENT NOTICE SOUTH AFRICAN REVENUE SERVICE INCOME TAX ACT, 1962
GOVERNMENT NOTICE SOUTH AFRICAN REVENUE SERVICE No. 391 18 May 2007 INCOME TAX ACT, 1962 CONVENTION BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF GHANA FOR
More informationAGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SEYCHELLES
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SEYCHELLES FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND THE PREVENTION OF FISCAL EVASION WITH RESPECT
More informationUK/FIJI DOUBLE TAXATION CONVENTION SIGNED 21 NOVEMBER Entered into force 27 August 1976
UK/FIJI DOUBLE TAXATION CONVENTION SIGNED 21 NOVEMBER 1975 Entered into force 27 August 1976 Effective from 1 April 1975 for corporation tax and from 6 April 1975 for income tax and capital gains tax Effective
More informationCyprus Bulgaria Tax Treaties
Cyprus Bulgaria Tax Treaties AGREEMENT OF 30 TH OCTOBER, 2000 This is the Convention between the Republic of Cyprus and the Republic of Bulgaria for the avoidance of double taxation with respect to taxes
More informationTECHNICAL EXPLANATION OF THE UNITED STATES-JAPAN INCOME TAX CONVENTION GENERAL EFFECTIVE DATE UNDER ARTICLE 28: 1 JANUARY 1973 TABLE OF ARTICLES
TECHNICAL EXPLANATION OF THE UNITED STATES-JAPAN INCOME TAX CONVENTION GENERAL EFFECTIVE DATE UNDER ARTICLE 28: 1 JANUARY 1973 It is the practice of the Treasury Department to prepare for the use of the
More informationCHARTERED TAX INSTITUTE OF MALAYSIA ( T) (Institut Percukaian Malaysia) PROFESSIONAL EXAMINATIONS ADVANCE TAXATION 2. Date
CHARTERED TAX INSTITUTE OF MALAYSIA (225750 T) (Institut Percukaian Malaysia) PROFESSIONAL EXAMINATIONS FINAL LEVEL ADVANCE TAXATION 2 JUNE 2017 Student Registration No. Desk No. Date Examination Centre
More informationAGREEMENT BETWEEN THE SWISS CONFEDERATION AND THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF BANGLADESH FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE SWISS CONFEDERATION AND THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF BANGLADESH FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION WITH RESPECT TO TAXES ON INCOME. THE SWISS FEDERAL COUNCIL AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE
More informationThe Government of the Republic of Estonia and the Government of the Kingdom of Thailand,
CONVENTION BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF ESTONIA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM OF THAILAND FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND THE PREVENTION OF FISCAL EVASION WITH RESPECT TO TAXES
More informationIN THE NAME OF ALLAH AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA
IN THE NAME OF ALLAH AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION WITH RESPECT TO TAXES ON INCOME
More informationMALTA. Agreement for Avoidance of Double Taxation and Prevention of Fiscal Evasion with Malta
MALTA Agreement for Avoidance of Double Taxation and Prevention of Fiscal Evasion with Malta Whereas the annexed Agreement between the Government of the Republic of India and the Republic of Malta for
More informationArticle 1 Persons Covered. Article 2 Taxes Covered
CONVENTION BETWEEN THE REPUBLIC OF PANAMA AND THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND THE PREVENTION OF FISCAL EVASION WITH RESPECT TO TAXES ON
More informationUK/NETHERLANDS DOUBLE TAXATION CONVENTION AND PROTOCOL SIGNED IN LONDON ON 26 SEPTEMBER 2008
UK/NETHERLANDS DOUBLE TAXATION CONVENTION AND PROTOCOL SIGNED IN LONDON ON 26 SEPTEMBER 2008 This Convention and Protocol have not yet entered into force. This will happen when both countries have completed
More informationMYANMAR (UNION OF MYANMAR)
MYANMAR (UNION OF MYANMAR) Agreement for avoidance of double taxation and prevention of fiscal evasion with union of Myanmar Whereas the annexed Agreement between the Government of the Republic of India
More informationCONVENTION BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF ESTONIA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF TURKMENISTAN FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND
CONVENTION BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF ESTONIA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF TURKMENISTAN FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND THE PREVENTION OF FISCAL EVASION WITH RESPECT TO TAXES ON INCOME
More informationR U L I N G (By Mr. Justice Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri)
BEFORE THE AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS (INCOME-TAX) NEW DELHI ========== Hon ble Mr. Justice Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri (Chairman) Mr. A.S. Narang (Member) Wednesday, the Fourteenth December Two Thousand
More informationLUXEMBOURG. ARTICLE 1 PERSONS COVERED This Agreement shall apply to persons who are residents of one or both of the Contracting States.
LUXEMBOURG Agreement for avoidance of double taxation and prevention of fiscal evasion with Luxembourg Whereas, an Agreement and the Protocol between the Government of Republic of India and the Government
More informationSri Lanka - Switzerland Income and Capital Tax Treaty (1983)
Page 1 of 12 Sri Lanka - Switzerland Income and Capital Tax Treaty (1983) Status: In Force Conclusion Date: 11 January 1983. Entry into Force: 14 September 1984. Effective Date: 1 April 1981 (Sri Lanka);
More informationDouble Taxation Avoidance Agreement between Philippines and China. Completed on November 18, 1999
Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between Philippines and China Completed on November 18, 1999 This document was downloaded from m r o o o (www.sas-ph.com). o o e er o erv e, oo ee,, o r o AGREEMENT
More informationUGANDA. Agreement for Avoidance of Double Taxation and Prevention of Fiscal Evasion with Uganda
UGANDA Agreement for Avoidance of Double Taxation and Prevention of Fiscal Evasion with Uganda Whereas the annexed Convention between the Government of the Republic of India and the Government of Uganda
More informationAGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TAIPEI REPRESENTATIVE OFFICE IN BELGIUM AND THE BELGIAN TRADE ASSOCIATION IN TAIPEI FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TAIPEI REPRESENTATIVE OFFICE IN BELGIUM AND THE BELGIAN TRADE ASSOCIATION IN TAIPEI FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND THE PREVENTION OF FISCAL EVASION WITH RESPECT TO TAXES
More informationAGREEMENT BETWEEN HIS MAJESTY'S GOVERNMENT OF NEPAL AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND THE
AGREEMENT BETWEEN HIS MAJESTY'S GOVERNMENT OF NEPAL AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND THE PREVENTION OF FISCAL EVASION WITH RESPECT TO TAXES
More informationCONVENTION BETWEEN THAILAND AND JAPAN FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND THE PREVENTION OF FISCAL EVASION WITH RESPECT TO TAXES ON INCOME
CONVENTION BETWEEN THAILAND AND JAPAN FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND THE PREVENTION OF FISCAL EVASION WITH RESPECT TO TAXES ON INCOME Article 1 [Persons covered] This Convention shall apply to
More informationBETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SEYCHELLES
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SEYCHELLES FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND THE PREVENTION OF FISCAL EVASION WITH RESPECT TO
More informationAGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF MAURITIUS AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SEYCHELLES FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF MAURITIUS AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SEYCHELLES FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND THE PREVENTION OF FISCAL EVASION WITH RESPECT TO
More informationLITHUANIA. ARTICLE 1 PERSONS COVERED This Agreement shall apply to persons who are residents of one or both of the Contracting States.
LITHUANIA Agreement for Avoidance of double taxation and prevention of fiscal evasion with foreign countries Lithuania Whereas an Agreement and the Protocol between the Government of the Republic of India
More informationAct (1994:1617) on the double taxation treaty between Sweden and the United States
Act (1994:1617) on the double taxation treaty between Sweden and the United States SFS : 1994:1617 Ministry / Authority : Ministry of Finance S3 Issued : 1994-12- 15 Modified SFS 2011:1368 Amendment Record
More informationForeign Collaboration
CHAPTER 17 Foreign Collaboration Some Key Points (a) The tax liability of a foreign collaborator and the Indian counter part is dependent on their residential status and the applicable provisions of DTAA,
More informationCyprus Egypt Tax Treaties
Cyprus Egypt Tax Treaties AGREEMENT OF 19 TH DECEMBER, 1993 This is the Convention between the Government of the Republic of Cyprus and the Government of the Arab Republic of Egypt for the avoidance of
More information1999 Income Tax Agreement
Treaty Partners: Indonesia; Seychelles Signed: September 27, 1999 In Force: April 20, 2000 Effective: January 1, 2001. See Article 28. Status: In Force 1999 Income Tax Agreement AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT
More informationDate of Conclusion: 1 August Entry into Force: 18 November Effective Date: 1 January 1977.
CONVENTION BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND THE PREVENTION OF FISCAL EVASION WITH RESPECT
More informationPersonal Scope Art. 1 This Agreement shall apply to persons who are residents of one or both of the Contracting
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE REPUBLIC OF BULGARIA AND THE REPUBLIC OF CROATIA FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION WITH RESPECT TO TAXES ON INCOME AND ON CAPITAL Prom. SG. 105/8 Sep 1998 The Republic of Bulgaria
More informationDouble Taxation Relief (India) Order 1986 (SR 1986/336)
Reprint as at 7 September 2017 Double Taxation Relief (India) Order 1986 (SR 1986/336) Paul Reeves, Governor-General Order in Council At Wellington this 24th day of November 1986 Present: His Excellency
More informationNOTIFICATION NO.2/2014 [F.NO.501/1/2003 FTD I]/SO 47(E), DATED
SECTION 90 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 DOUBLE TAXATION AGREEMENT AGREEMENT FOR AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND PREVENTION OF FISCAL EVASION WITH FOREIGN COUNTRIES ALBANIA NOTIFICATION NO.2/2014 [F.NO.501/1/2003
More informationR U L I N G (By Mr. Justice Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri)
BEFORE THE AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS (INCOME TAX) NEW DELHI ========== P R E S E N T Hon ble Mr. Justice Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri (Chairman) Mr. K.D. Singh (Member) Monday, eighteenth October two
More informationConvention. between. New Zealand and Japan. for the. Avoidance of Double Taxation. and the Prevention of Fiscal Evasion
Convention between New Zealand and Japan for the Avoidance of Double Taxation and the Prevention of Fiscal Evasion with respect to Taxes on Income New Zealand and Japan, Desiring to conclude a new Convention
More informationDouble Taxation Avoidance Agreement between Kazakhstan and Singapore
Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between Kazakhstan and Singapore Entered into force on August 14, 2007 This document was downloaded from ASEAN Briefing (www.aseanbriefing.com) and was compiled by the
More informationSERBIA Agreement for avoidance of double taxation and prevention of fiscal evasion with Serbia Notification : PERSONAL SCOPE TAXES COVERED
SERBIA Agreement for avoidance of double taxation and prevention of fiscal evasion with Serbia WHEREAS the annexed Convention between the Government of Republic of India and the Council of Ministers of
More informationAGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TRADE OFFICE OF SWISS INDUSTRIES, TAIPEI AND THE TAIPEI CULTURAL AND ECONOMIC DELEGATION IN SWITZERLAND
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TRADE OFFICE OF SWISS INDUSTRIES, TAIPEI AND THE TAIPEI CULTURAL AND ECONOMIC DELEGATION IN SWITZERLAND FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION WITH RESPECT TO TAXES ON INCOME THE TRADE
More informationSri Lanka - Sweden Income and Capital Tax Treaty (1983)
Page 1 of 13 Sri Lanka - Sweden Income and Capital Tax Treaty (1983) Status: In Force Conclusion Date: 23 February 1983. Entry into Force: 30 July 1984. Effective Date: 1 January 1985 (Sweden); 1 April
More informationAGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM OF LESOTHO FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM OF LESOTHO FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND THE PREVENTION OF FISCAL EVASION WITH RESPECT TO TAXES
More informationCyprus Italy Tax Treaties
Cyprus Italy Tax Treaties AGREEMENT OF 24 TH APRIL, 1974 AS AMENDED BY PROTOCOL OF 7 TH OCTOBER, 1980 This is a Convention between Cyprus and Italy for the avoidance of double taxation and the prevention
More informationDouble Taxation Avoidance Agreement between Thailand and Hong Kong
Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between Thailand and Hong Kong This document was downloaded from ASEAN Briefing (www.aseanbriefing.com) and was compiled by the tax experts at Dezan Shira & Associates
More informationTHE GOVERNMENT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE,
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND THE PREVENTION OF FISCAL EVASION WITH RESPECT
More informationITALY Agreement for avoidance for double taxation and prevention of fiscal evasion with Italy Whereas the annexed Convention between the Government
ITALY Agreement for avoidance for double taxation and prevention of fiscal evasion with Italy Whereas the annexed Convention between the Government of the Republic of India and the Government of the Republic
More informationC O N V E N T I O N BETWEEN THE SWISS FEDERAL COUNCIL AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM OF SAUDI ARABIA
C O N V E N T I O N BETWEEN THE SWISS FEDERAL COUNCIL AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM OF SAUDI ARABIA FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION WITH RESPECT TO TAXES ON INCOME AND ON CAPITAL AND THE PREVENTION
More informationPERSONS COVERED TAXES COVERED GENERAL DEFINITIONS
BGBl. III - Ausgegeben am 16. Juli 2004 - Nr. 81 1 von 13 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF AUSTRIA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION
More informationTHE GOVERNMENT OF AUSTRALIA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDIA,
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF AUSTRALIA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDIA FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND THE PREVENTION OF FISCAL EVASION WITH RESPECT TO TAXES ON INCOME THE GOVERNMENT
More information