← All Phrases

“fees for technical services”

International TaxSection 9(1)(vii)Section 9(1)(vii)1,408 judgments

The decision most relied on for fees for technical services is Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence (P) Ltd. v. CIT (432 ITR 471), cited in 914 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on fees for technical services

Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence (P) Ltd. v. CIT
432 ITR 471 · 2021 · Supreme Court
914
citing judgments

Payments for the supply or use of computer software, where there is no transfer of copyright but only a right to use the copyrighted product, are generally considered business profits and not 'royalty' or 'fees for technical services' under the Income Tax Act, 1961 or relevant DTAAs. This principle also applies to transponder fees, which are not taxable as royalty.

CIT v. De Beers India Minerals (P.) Ltd.
346 ITR 467 · 2012 · High Court
371
citing judgments

For fees for technical or consultancy services to 'make available' technical knowledge or know-how under a DTAA, the service must transmit such knowledge, allowing the recipient to derive an enduring benefit and utilize it independently in the future.

DIT v. Nokia Networks OY
358 ITR 259 · 2013 · High Court
276
citing judgments

Payments for the supply of software along with telecom equipment are not in the nature of royalty if they are for the use of a copyrighted article, not the copyright itself. Such payments are not taxable in India in the absence of a Permanent Establishment (PE).

DIT v. Infrasoft Ltd.
39 Taxmann.com 88 · 2013 · High Court
269
citing judgments

Payments for the use of copyrighted software, without the transfer of any rights in the underlying copyright itself, do not constitute 'royalty' under the Income-tax Act or tax treaties. Such payments are often treated as business income, taxable only if a permanent establishment exists.

CIT v. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft
310 ITR 320 · 2009 · High Court
259
citing judgments

Reimbursements of actual expenses without any profit element are not taxable income. Additionally, mere amendments to the Income-tax Act do not override the provisions of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements (DTAAs).

Skycell Communications Ltd. v. DCIT
251 ITR 53 · 2001 · High Court
253
citing judgments

Technical services involve human intervention and expertise, not just routine or machine-based operations. Routine customer support and standard facility provision through technology do not constitute technical services under the Act.

Transmission Corporation of Andhra Pradesh v. CIT
239 ITR 587 · 1999 · Supreme Court
243
citing judgments

The Supreme Court lays down principles for deducting tax at source (TDS) under Section 195 on payments to non-residents, including aspects of income deemed taxable in India and the application of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements (DTAAs) under Section 90.

ONGC v. CIT
376 ITR 306 · 2015 · Supreme Court
241
citing judgments

Income derived by a non-resident for services related to mineral oil operations, falling under the presumptive taxation regime of Section 44BB, cannot simultaneously be treated as fees for technical services under Section 9(1)(vii). The specific presumptive provisions override the general FTS definition, particularly when DTAA applies.

Judgments citing fees for technical services

Johnson Matthey India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 13(2), New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 253/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Nov 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kambledr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 2025/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 279/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 889/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Addl. Cit, Vs M/S Johnson Matthey India Pvt. Ltd., Special Range-5, 103, Ashok Estate, Barakhamba Road New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacj2919A

For Appellant: Sh. Sumit Mangal, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Surenderpal, CIT DR &

Sony Ericsson Mobile Communication India (P) Ltd. and other judgments have laid down that segregation of international transaction of payment of royalty and fees for technical services is justified as these are not linked with import of raw material etc. Thus, he submitted that royalty cannot be aggregated with other

Johnson Matthey India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 13(2), New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 252/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Nov 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kambledr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 2025/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 279/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 889/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Addl. Cit, Vs M/S Johnson Matthey India Pvt. Ltd., Special Range-5, 103, Ashok Estate, Barakhamba Road New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacj2919A

For Appellant: Sh. Sumit Mangal, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Surenderpal, CIT DR &

Sony Ericsson Mobile Communication India (P) Ltd. and other judgments have laid down that segregation of international transaction of payment of royalty and fees for technical services is justified as these are not linked with import of raw material etc. Thus, he submitted that royalty cannot be aggregated with other

Johnson Matthey India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2209/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Nov 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kambledr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 2025/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 279/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 889/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Addl. Cit, Vs M/S Johnson Matthey India Pvt. Ltd., Special Range-5, 103, Ashok Estate, Barakhamba Road New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacj2919A

For Appellant: Sh. Sumit Mangal, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Surenderpal, CIT DR &

Sony Ericsson Mobile Communication India (P) Ltd. and other judgments have laid down that segregation of international transaction of payment of royalty and fees for technical services is justified as these are not linked with import of raw material etc. Thus, he submitted that royalty cannot be aggregated with other

Addl. CIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Johnson Matthey India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2025/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Nov 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kambledr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 2025/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 279/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 889/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Addl. Cit, Vs M/S Johnson Matthey India Pvt. Ltd., Special Range-5, 103, Ashok Estate, Barakhamba Road New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacj2919A

For Appellant: Sh. Sumit Mangal, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Surenderpal, CIT DR &

Sony Ericsson Mobile Communication India (P) Ltd. and other judgments have laid down that segregation of international transaction of payment of royalty and fees for technical services is justified as these are not linked with import of raw material etc. Thus, he submitted that royalty cannot be aggregated with other

Nokia India Sales P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. Addl.CIT, Special Range-6, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7244/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 7244/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Nokia India Sales Pvt. Ltd., Vs Addl. Cit, 807, New Delhi House, Special Range-6, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccn9141L Assessee By : Sh. Nageshwar Rao, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Surenderpal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 29.07.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.10.2021

For Appellant: Sh. Nageshwar Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Surenderpal, CIT DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 194JSection 40Section 9(1)(vii)

that the amounts incurred by the Appellant towards such trade offers/ discounts extended to HCL/ other distributors alternatively fall within the ambit of 'fees for technical services’ as defined under Explanation 2 to Section 9(1)(vii) of the Act and thus, allegedly liable to tax deduction at source under

M/S. Rajinder Kumar Aggarwal (HUF), New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2996/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Oct 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri O.P. Kant[Through Video Conferencing] Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40Section 9

favour. 6. That the said commission paid to non-resident, who is a tax resident of France, is business income and not fees for technical services (FTS). As such, it is neither liable for tax in India under Section 9 of the Act nor under Article 7 of DTAA with ... contention of the assessee and held that as per the provisions of Explanation to section 9 for the purpose of clause (vii) (i.e. fee for technical services), the scope of the income includes services rendered outside India also, if the same have been utilized in India insofar as source

Inter Continental Hotels Group (Asia Pacific) Pte Ltd., Singapore vs. ACIT, Circle- 2(1)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4524/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Sh. S. K. Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Umesh Takyar, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 144C(3)

from Inter Continental Hotels Group (India) Private Limited ('IHG India') on account of support services provided by the Assessee as Fee for Technical Services (FTS) under the India- Singapore Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement('DTAA'). 8. The assessee, being the regional headquarters, has centralized departments which provide services in the nature ... more beneficial vis-a-vis the Act. 12. As per Article 12(4) of the tax treaty between India and Singapore, the term 'fees for technical services' means payments of any kind received as a consideration for services of a managerial, technical or consultancy nature if such services

Amitabh Chaturvedi, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 63(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4001/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Sept 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri Kuldip Singh[Through Video Conferencing] Assessment Year: 2013-14

Section 143(3)Section 40

price of the machinery and equipment; (k) the furnishing of services including managerial services, other than those taxable under Article 13 (Royalties and fees for technical services), within a Contracting State by an enterprise through employees or other personnel, but only if: (i) activities of that nature continue within that

JCIT, Special Range-1, New Delhi vs. American Express (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the Cross-objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 4487/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K.Panda & Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year : 2012-13 American Express (India) Pvt.Ltd., Vs Jcit, Metropolitan Saket, 7Th Floor, Office Special Range-I, Block, District Centre, Saket, New Delhi-110002. New Delhi-110017. Pan-Aaaca8163F Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 253Section 40

case and in law, the Learned CIT(A) / Learned AO have erred in holding the aforesaid reimbursement of relocation expenses as "Fees for technical services" ('FTS') under section 9(1)(vii) of the Act and Article 12(4) of the India-USA Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement ('DTAA'). 3.3 Based ... appellant, if any. 10. Further, Ld.CIT(A) agreed with the conclusion drawn by the Assessing Officer/TPO that the payment towards travel expenses constitutes fee for technical services in terms of section 9(1)(vii) of the Act and Article 12 (4) of India US DTAA. It was further held that

American Express (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. JCIT, Special, Range-1, New Delhi

In the result, the Cross-objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3769/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Sept 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.K.Panda & Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year : 2012-13 American Express (India) Pvt.Ltd., Vs Jcit, Metropolitan Saket, 7Th Floor, Office Special Range-I, Block, District Centre, Saket, New Delhi-110002. New Delhi-110017. Pan-Aaaca8163F Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 253Section 40

case and in law, the Learned CIT(A) / Learned AO have erred in holding the aforesaid reimbursement of relocation expenses as "Fees for technical services" ('FTS') under section 9(1)(vii) of the Act and Article 12(4) of the India-USA Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement ('DTAA'). 3.3 Based ... appellant, if any. 10. Further, Ld.CIT(A) agreed with the conclusion drawn by the Assessing Officer/TPO that the payment towards travel expenses constitutes fee for technical services in terms of section 9(1)(vii) of the Act and Article 12 (4) of India US DTAA. It was further held that

JCIT, Special, Range-1, New Delhi vs. American Express (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the Cross-objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3148/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Sept 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.K.Panda & Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year : 2012-13 American Express (India) Pvt.Ltd., Vs Jcit, Metropolitan Saket, 7Th Floor, Office Special Range-I, Block, District Centre, Saket, New Delhi-110002. New Delhi-110017. Pan-Aaaca8163F Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 253Section 40

case and in law, the Learned CIT(A) / Learned AO have erred in holding the aforesaid reimbursement of relocation expenses as "Fees for technical services" ('FTS') under section 9(1)(vii) of the Act and Article 12(4) of the India-USA Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement ('DTAA'). 3.3 Based ... appellant, if any. 10. Further, Ld.CIT(A) agreed with the conclusion drawn by the Assessing Officer/TPO that the payment towards travel expenses constitutes fee for technical services in terms of section 9(1)(vii) of the Act and Article 12 (4) of India US DTAA. It was further held that

JCIT, Special Range-1, New Delhi vs. American Express (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the Cross-objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2834/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K.Panda & Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year : 2012-13 American Express (India) Pvt.Ltd., Vs Jcit, Metropolitan Saket, 7Th Floor, Office Special Range-I, Block, District Centre, Saket, New Delhi-110002. New Delhi-110017. Pan-Aaaca8163F Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 253Section 40

case and in law, the Learned CIT(A) / Learned AO have erred in holding the aforesaid reimbursement of relocation expenses as "Fees for technical services" ('FTS') under section 9(1)(vii) of the Act and Article 12(4) of the India-USA Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement ('DTAA'). 3.3 Based ... appellant, if any. 10. Further, Ld.CIT(A) agreed with the conclusion drawn by the Assessing Officer/TPO that the payment towards travel expenses constitutes fee for technical services in terms of section 9(1)(vii) of the Act and Article 12 (4) of India US DTAA. It was further held that

American Express (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. JCIT, Special Range-1, New Delhi

In the result, the Cross-objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2714/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K.Panda & Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year : 2012-13 American Express (India) Pvt.Ltd., Vs Jcit, Metropolitan Saket, 7Th Floor, Office Special Range-I, Block, District Centre, Saket, New Delhi-110002. New Delhi-110017. Pan-Aaaca8163F Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 253Section 40

case and in law, the Learned CIT(A) / Learned AO have erred in holding the aforesaid reimbursement of relocation expenses as "Fees for technical services" ('FTS') under section 9(1)(vii) of the Act and Article 12(4) of the India-USA Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement ('DTAA'). 3.3 Based ... appellant, if any. 10. Further, Ld.CIT(A) agreed with the conclusion drawn by the Assessing Officer/TPO that the payment towards travel expenses constitutes fee for technical services in terms of section 9(1)(vii) of the Act and Article 12 (4) of India US DTAA. It was further held that

Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl.CIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 934/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri O.P. Kant[Through Video Conferencing] Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 115JSection 250Section 40Section 9

Learned CIT (A) has erred in confirming the aforesaid disallowance by alternatively alleging the IUC charges to be in the nature of ‘fees for technical services’ under the provisions of Section 9(i)(vii) of the Act and the applicable DTAAs. 8. That on the facts and circumstances

International Management Group (Uk) Limited, London vs. ACIT (International Taxation) - 2(1)(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 118/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Sept 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Kul Bharat(Through Video Conferencing) International Management Vs. Acit (International Group (Uk) Limited Taxation)-2(1)(1) Vatika Business Centre, New Delhi 2Nd Floor, Business Suites No.24 & 25, First India Place, Sushant Lok-I, Phase-I, Block-B, Mehrauli Gurgaon Road, Gurgaon Haryana- 122 002 Pan No. Aabci 9309 N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rishabh Malhotra, C.A. Revenue By Mrs Vandana Ramchandran, Cit Date Of Hearing: 08.09.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 08.09.2021 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), (Intl. Taxn.) New Delhi Under Section 144C(5) Of The Act Pursuant

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)

well as Hon’ble DRP erred in concluding that the balance receipts amounting to Rs. 7,67,57,010/- would partake character of fees for technical services as per the provisions of Article 13 (4) (c) of the India-UK DTAA. 4. That in the facts and circumstances ... issue involved in the present appeal is whether the balance receipts not attributable to permanent establishment of the assessee can be taxed as fees for technical services under Article- 13 of the India-UK Tax Treaty. He fairly submitted that the identical issue arose in assessee’s own case

M/S. Mondon Investments Ltd., New Delhi vs. DDIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3303/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Sept 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Umesh Takyar, Sr. DR
Section 234A

payment. Relevant Paragraph has been reproduced: "8. Thus, while interpreting similar clause of Indo-German DTAA in relation to taxing royalty or fees for technical services, this Court had confirmed the decision of tribunal holding that such service can be taxed only on receipt. This decision was later on followed

DCIT (International Taxation), Circle-3(1)(2), New Delhi vs. M/S. Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide Inc., Noida

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5189/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 115ASection 9

reservation, marketing, advertising, operation, administration, catering, network support services, Starwood Portal Services, imparting of skill sets through trainings etc. were not taxable as "Fee for Technical Services" (FTS) within the meaning and scope of section 9 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as well as Article 12 of the India ... Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between India and the USA. The Assessing Officer held that the assessee company had received income from fees from technical services as per provision of both DTAA and section 115A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer relying on the assessment order of group

DCIT, Circle-5(2), New Delhi vs. Caparo Power Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 6401/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Aug 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT DR
Section 139Section 194Section 194CSection 194HSection 194ISection 194JSection 194LSection 2Section 201Section 203A

this sub-clause,— (i) “commission or brokerage” shall have the same meaning as in clause (i) of the Explanation to section 194H; (ii) “fees for technical services” shall have the same meaning as in Explanation 2 to clause (vii) of sub-section (1) of section 9; (iii) “professional services” shall

Telenor Asa, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1307/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Aug 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 1307/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Telenor Asa, Vs Dcit, C/O Vaish Associates Advocates, Circle-Gurgaon, Intl. Taxation, 1St Floor, Mohandev Building, 13, New Delhi-110002 Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadct5705F Assessee By : Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Revenue By : Dr. Prabha Kant, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 03.06.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 12.08.2021

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Dr. Prabha Kant, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 234B

Telenor ASA liable to tax as business profit under Article 7 of the India-Norway Double Tax Avoidance Agreement (‘the Treaty’) instead of “Fees for technical services” (“FTS”) under Article 12, as contended by the appellant. 3. That the Assessing Officer erred on facts and in law in holding that ... Treaty was not breached. 4. That without prejudice, the Assessing Officer erred on facts and in law in not appreciating that fees for technical services received by the appellant from Unitech Wireless was not ‘effectively connected’ to any pre-existing PE of the appellant in India, ; in terms of Article

Boysen India Ltd, Noida vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Noida

ITA 1969/DEL/2018[2016-17 (Q3)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Aug 2021

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Bhoop Singh, Senior DR
Section 234E

filing income-tax and TDS return regularly. During the third quarter ending 31.12.2015 i.e. from 01.10.2015 to 31.12.2015, the assessee company has provided fee for technical services payable to M/s. Friedrich Boysen GmbH & Co. KG., Germany who did not have Permanent Account Number. Assessing Officer (AO) noticed that ... from its statutory auditors, the company was required to deduct tax at source at 10% as per Para 2 of Article No.12-Royalties and Fees for Technical Services of DTAA between India & Germany. However, while uploading the TDS return, the rate was automatically got changed to 20% instead