Sulla nozione di “royalty” e di “commissioni per servizi tecnici”, nonché sulla possibilità di configurare una S.O. alla luce delle definizioni contenute nell’art. 12, paragrafi 4 e 5 e nell’art. 5, paragrafo 3 della Convenzione contro la doppia imposizione tra il Governo Olandese e il Governo della Repubblica Indiana.
Abstract
The Income Tax
Appellate Tribunal of Kolkata states that where a software is supplied together
with the hardware, and it cannot operate independently from the latter, it is
not taxable as "royalty” under the provisions of Article 12 (4) of the India -
Netherlands Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement ("DTAA”). Moreover, the
maintenance activities do not correspond to installation activities and,
therefore, could not give raise to a PE under Article 5 (3) of the India -
Netherlands DTAA.
References
- S.N. SHAN, Treaty between India and Netherlands - Indian ITAT decision: software embedded in supply of equipment not royalty, 17 March 2017, IBFD Newsletter.
- P.R.K. JHABAKH, “India - Characterization of Software Transactions for Tax Treaty Purposes - The Infrasoft (2013) Case”, Bulletin for International Taxation, 2014 (Volume 68), No 4/5.
Close [X]
Buy the article
Cibo assum quidam at est, iusto tibique dissentiet eum ad. Te partem persius mentitum pri. Duo no commodo senserit. Ferri rebum debitis ea pri, timeam blandit rationibus te nam. Velit phaedrum interpretaris his id, mutat vidisse facilis eu pri.
