Skip to content


Authority for Advance Rulings Court March 2001 Judgments Home Cases Authority for Advance Rulings 2001 Page 1 of about 4 results (0.033 seconds)

Mar 07 2001 (TRI)

In Re: Balu Doraisamy

Court : Authority for Advance Rulings

In Re: Arthur E. Newell, TC S32.3079; In Re: Monte Harris, , TC S32.3078 1. Mr. Balu Doraisamy is a resident of Singapore. He is employed with M/s. Compaq Computers India (P) Ltd. ("CCIPL") as managing director.Earlier he was with M/s. Compaq Computers Asia (P) Ltd. ("CCAPL") which is a subsidiary company of Compaq Group of Computers Corporation (COMPAQ), a US based company. It manufactures several ranges of notebook computers, which are subsequently distributed worldwide.2. The Indian subsidiary was set up to market and distribute Compaq's products in India. As managing director, his responsibilities include overseeing the day-to-day operations of the company, accountability to the customers for the technical performance of the products and financial performance and well being as well as security of the employees of the company. It was also stated that his services are also utilised for checking the feasibility of new technologies in India, which would help in cost cutting and provid...

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 07 2001 (TRI)

In Re: Xyz/Abc, Equity Fund

Court : Authority for Advance Rulings

In Re: Cyril Eugene Pareira, AAR No. 385/97, Leaming v. Jones, 1930 15 Tax Cases 333; William Esplen, Son & Swainston Ltd. v. IRC 1919 2 KB 731; Rellim v. Vise, 1952 22 ITR (Suppl.) 51 (CA); IRC v. The Korean Syndicate Ltd. 1921 12 Tax Cases 181 1. The applicant XYZ/ABC Equity Fund, Mauritius has made this application seeking advance ruling on as many as 16 questions which are as under : 1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, XYZ/ABC Equity Fund, (hereinafter referred to as the "Applicant") will be a resident in Mauritius and hence, entitled to the benefits of the Convention between the Government of the Republic of India and the Government of Mauritius for Avoidance of Double Taxation and Prevention of Fiscal Evasion with respect to Taxes on Income and Capital Gains and for Encouragement of Mutual Trade and Investment, as notified on 6th December, 1983 (hereinafter referred to as the "Treaty"). 2. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, based on the ...

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 07 2001 (TRI)

In Re: Ms. Ruth Connolly

Court : Authority for Advance Rulings

1. The applicant is currently employed with SAP India Systems, Applications and Products In Data Processing Private Limited ("SAP India"). SAP India is an Indian subsidiary of SAP Germany. SAP India was incorporated on 14th March, 1996, and is engaged in the business of duplication and distribution of SAP AG's proprietary R/3 software in India. The R/3 software is an application software, which is used to integrate various business functions such as inventory management, quality management, etc. with the main financial system of the user.2. The applicant is a resident of USA and was on regular employment with SAP Singapore, another company of the said group. SAP Singapore has deputed her to SAP India as its President for a period of 2 years commencing from 1st April, 1999.3. The duties assigned to her as President SAP India included coordinating the customization of the SAP software to suit customers requirement, training personnel in connection with the high end technology operations...

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 07 2001 (TRI)

In Re: Dr. U. Muralidharan

Court : Authority for Advance Rulings

Reported in : (2002)254ITR322AAR

1. The applicant is the general manager with M/s. Timken Engineering and Research (India) (P) Ltd. ("TERPL") a subsidiary company of M/s.Timken Company, USA w.e.f. 1st November, 1998. He was earlier working with the parent company in USA, as a product development specialist.The applicant has sought a ruling under s. 10(5B) of the IT Act on the following questions (a) Whether the applicant satisfies the definition of "technician" for the purpose of s. 10(5B); (b) Whether the applicant is entitled to exemption under s. 10(5B) of the IT Act, 1961 2. The eligibility criteria under s. 10(5B) of the Act requires the applicant to be a technician, thereby meaning a person having specialised knowledge and experience in the fields referred to in the said section or such other field as the Central Government may specify by notification in the Official Gazette and who is employed in India in a capacity in which such specialised knowledge and experience are actually utilised. It is also essential ...

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //