S.No.

Particulars

Country

Status

Ruling

1

Robert W. Smith (1995) 212 ITR 275

United States of America

Non-resident individual

The applicant is considered as a technician as he has specialised knowledge & experience in constructional & manufacturing operations & can avail
exemption.

2

Monte Harris(1996) 218 ITR 413

United States of America

Non-resident individual

The applicant, engaged as an Engineer Manager is considered as a technician &
can avail exemption.

3

John A. Sayre(1999) 103 Taxman 78

Non-resident individual

• The applicant, a non resident, is employed with NIKO Resources Ltd. which along with Gujarat State Petrochemical Ltd. obtained a turnkey contract from Govt. of India for prospecting for and extraction of mineral oil in Gujarat.

• The applicant has a degree in Geology & also has vast expertise & skill in the business of prospecting for & extraction of mineral oil. He is responsible for the production operations of three operating oil & gas fields. He is not employed to do any constructional work nor does he have any academic qualification or degree in civil or mechanical engineering or training in that line.

• For the purpose of section 10(5B), special knowledge & not general knowledge is required.

• For the above reasons, the applicant is not covered under clause (i) of Explanation to section 10(5B) and cannot avail exemption.

4

(1999) 104 Taxman 372 (AAR)

Netherlands

Non-resident individual

• The applicant was assigned by his employer to an oil refinery project in India as Construction Director. He had not received any technical education but had vide experience of over 30 years of working on similar projects all over the world.

• The tax on his remuneration is to be borne by the employer company.

• The applicant should be considered as ‘Technician’ for claiming exemption

5

Amir Zai Singin (1999) 104 Taxman 179 (AAR)

Sweden

Non-resident individual

• The applicant, a non-resident, was employed by a foreign company for working
  as a Technical Project Manager in a project with an Indian company. The tax
  liability of the applicant was borne by the employer.