ARTICLE 27 Mutual Agreement Procedure 　　This Article provides for cooperation between the competent authorities of the Contracting States to resolve disputes which may arise under the Convention and to resolve cases of double taxation not provided for in the Convention. The competent authorities of the two Contracting States are identified in subparagraph (h) of paragraph 1 of Article 3 (General Definitions). 　　Paragraph 1 provides that where a resident of a Contracting State considers that the actions of one or both Contracting States will result for him in taxation which is not in accordance with the Convention he may present his case to the competent authority of his State of residence or nationality. It is not necessary for a person first to have exhausted the remedies provided under the national laws of the Contracting States before presenting a case to the competent authorities. The paragraph provides that a case must be presented to the competent authorities no later than three years from the date of the receipt of notification of the assessment which gives rise to the double taxation or taxation not in accordance with the provisions of the Convention. Thus, for example, if the Internal Revenue Service makes a section 482 adjustment on a taxpayer's 1990 return, and, in 1994, sends the statutory notice of assessment which results in double taxation, the taxpayer has until 1997 to present his case to the competent authority. When the case results from the combined action of the tax authorities in the two Contracting States, the three-year tine period begins to run when the formal notification of the second action is given. Although it is preferred U.S. policy to provide no time limit for the presentation of a case to the competent authorities the limit in paragraph 1 of the Convention should not result in any unreasonable denial of protection or assistance to taxpayers. 　　Paragraph 2 provides that if the competent authority of the Contracting State to which the case is presented judges the case to have merit, and cannot reach a unilateral solution, it shall seek agreement with the competent authority of the other Contracting State such that taxation not in accordance with the Convention will be avoided. If agreement is reached under this provision, it is to be implemented even if implementation is otherwise barred by the statute of limitations or by some other procedural limitation, such as a closing agreement. Because, as specified in paragraph 2 of Article 1 (General Scope), the Convention cannot operate to increase a taxpayer's liability, time or other procedural limitations can be overridden only for the purpose of making refunds and not to impose additional tax. 　　Paragraph 3 authorizes the competent authorities to seek to resolve difficulties or doubts that may arise as to the application or interpretation of the Convention. While the paragraph does not include the list of examples of the kinds of matters about which the competent authorities may reach agreement which is found in the U.S. Model, it is understood that the powers of the competent authorities are generally as broad under the Convention as under the U.S. Model. Paragraph 3 also authorizes the competent authorities to consult for the purpose of eliminating double taxation in cases not provided for in the Convention, but with respect to the taxes covered by the Convention. An example of such a case might be double taxation arising from a transfer pricing adjustment between two permanent establishments of a third-country resident, one in the United States and one in India. Since no resident of a Contracting State is involved in the case, the Convention does not, by its terms, apply, but the competent authorities may, nevertheless, use the authority of the Convention to seek to prevent the double taxation. 　　Paragraph 4 provides that the competent authorities may communicate with each other, including, where appropriate, in face-to-face meetings of representatives of the competent authorities, for the purpose of reaching agreement under this Article. The Article confirms the authority of the competent authorities to develop bilateral and unilateral procedures to implement the Article. 　　This Article is not subject to the saving clause of paragraph 3 of Article 1 (General Scope). Thus, for example, rules, definitions, procedures, etc., which are agreed upon by the competent authorities under this Article, may be applied by the United States with respect to its citizens and residents even if they differ from the comparable Code provisions. Similarly, as indicated above, U.S. law may be overridden to provide refunds of tax to a U.S. citizen or resident under this Article. ARTICLE 28 Exchange or Information and Administrative Assistance 　　This Article provides for the exchange of information, including documents, between the competent authorities of the Contracting States. The information to be exchanged is that necessary for carrying out the provisions of the Convention or the domestic laws of the United States or Germany concerning the taxes covered by the Convention. Exchange of information with respect to domestic law is authorized insofar as the taxation under those domestic laws is not contrary to the Convention. Thus, for example, information may be exchanged with respect to a covered tax, even if the transaction to which the information relates is a purely domestic transaction in the requesting State and, therefore, the exchange is not made for the purpose of carrying out the Convention. 　　Paragraph 1 states that information exchange is not restricted by Article 1 (General Scope). This means that information may be requested and provided under this Article with respect to persons who are not residents of either Contracting State. For example, if a thirdcountry resident has a permanent establishment in India which engages in transactions with a U.S. enterprise, the United States could request information with respect to that permanent establishment, even though it is not a resident of either Contracting State. Similarly, if a thirdcountry resident maintains a bank account in India and the Internal Revenue Service has reason to believe that funds in that account should have been reported for U.S. tax purposes but have not been so reported, information can be requested from India with respect to that person's account. 　　Paragraph 1 also provides assurances that any information exchanged will be treated as secret, subject to the same disclosure constraints as information obtained under the laws of the requesting State. Information received may be disclosed only to persons, including courts and administrative bodies, concerned with the assessment, collection, enforcement or prosecution in respect of the taxes to which the information relates, or to persons concerned with the administration of these taxes. The information must be used by these persons in connection with these designated functions. Persons concerned with the administration of taxes, in the United States, include legislative bodies, such as the tax-writing committees of Congress and the General Accounting Office. Information received by these bodies is for use in the performance of their role in overseeing the administration of U.S. tax laws. Information received may be disclosed in public court proceedings or in judicial decisions. The paragraph confirms the right of the competent authorities to develop procedures for the exchange of information, including, where appropriate, the exchange of information regarding tax avoidance. 　　Paragraph 2 specifies that the Contracting States will utilize Article 26 to exchange information on a routine basis, on request in relation to a specific case, or on other bases (e.g., spontaneously). The classes of information to be exchanged on a routine basis are to be determined, from time to time, by the competent authorities. 　　Paragraph 3 explains that the obligations undertaken in paragraph 1 to exchange information do not require a Contracting State to carry out administrative measures which are at variance with the laws or administrative practice of either State. Nor does that paragraph require a Contracting State to supply information not obtainable under the laws or administrative practice of either State, or to disclose trade secrets or other information, the disclosure of which would be contrary to public policy. Either Contracting State may, however, at its discretion, subject to the limitations of the paragraph and its internal law, provide information which it is not obligated to provide under the provisions of this paragraph. 　　Paragraph 4 provides that when information is requested by a Contracting State in accordance with this Article, the other Contracting State is obligated to obtain the requested information as if the tax in question were the tax of the requested State, even if that State has no direct tax interest in the case to which the request relates. The paragraph further provides that the requesting State may specify the form in which information is to be provided (e.g., depositions of witnesses and authenticated copies of original documents) so that the information can be usable in the judicial proceedings of the requesting State. The requested State should, if possible, provide the information in the form requested to the same extent that it can obtain information in that form under its own laws and administrative practices with respect to its own taxes. 　　Paragraph 5 specifies the taxes in respect of which information may be exchanged. As in the U.S. Model, the category of taxes covered for exchange of information purposes is broader than the category of taxes covered for other purposes of the Convention, as specified in Article 2 (Taxes Covered). Article 28 applies, in the united States, to all taxes imposed under Title 26 of the U.S. Code (i.e., taxes imposed by the Internal Revenue Code). In India, the Article applies to the income tax, the wealth tax and the gift tax. ARTICLE 29 Diplomatic Agents and Consular Officers 　　This Article provides that any fiscal privileges to which diplomatic or consular officials are entitled under general provisions of international law or under special agreements will apply notwithstanding any provisions to the contrary in the Convention. 　　The saving clause of paragraph 3 of Article 1 (General Scope) does not apply to override any benefits of this Article available to an individual who is neither a citizen of the United States nor has immigrant status there. ARTICLE 30 Entry into Force 　　This Article provides the rules for bringing the Convention into force and giving effect to its provisions. Paragraph 1 provides for the notification through diplomatic channels by each Contracting State of the other that the legal procedures to bring the Convention into force have been completed. In the United States, this is the signing of the ratification document by the President, on the advice and consent of the Senate. 　　Paragraph 2 provides that the Convention will enter into force on the date of the latter of such notifications. It further provides the rules for the effective dates of the provisions of the Convention. Subparagraph 2(a) contains the effective dates for the United States. In the United States, Convention will have effect with respect to taxes withheld at source for amounts paid or credited on or after January 1 next following the date on which the Convention enters into force. For all other taxes, the Convention will have effect for any taxable period beginning on or after January 1 next following date on which the Convention enters into force. 　　Subparagraph 2(b) provides that in India the Convention will have effect in respect of income arising in any taxable year which begins on or after April 1 of the year next following the calendar year in which the Convention enters into force. ARTICLE 31 Termination 　　The Convention is to remain in effect indefinitely, unless terminated by one of the Contracting States in accordance with the provisions of Article 31. Either Contracting State may give the other Contracting State through diplomatic channels written notice of termination at any time on or before June 30 in any calendar year which begins after the expiration of a period of five years from the date of the Convention's entry into force. Thus, if, for example, the Convention enters into force on May 1, 1990, either State may give notice of termination during the period beginning January 1 and ending June 30 in any calendar year after 1995. If notice is given on or before June 30 of any calendar year beginning after the expiration of the five-year period, the termination will have effect as follows: 　　(1) In the United States, with respect to taxes withheld at source, the Convention will cease to have effect for amounts paid or credited on or after January 1 of the calendar year following the year in which the notice is given. With respect to other taxes, the Convention will cease to have effect for taxable periods beginning on or after January 1 of the calendar year following the year in which notice is given. 　　(2) In India, the Convention will cease to have effect for income arising in any taxable year beginning on or after April 1 of the year next following the calendar year in which the notice of termination is given. 　　Nothing in Article 31, which relates to unilateral termination by a Contracting State of the Convention, should be construed as preventing the Contracting States from entering into a new bilateral agreement that supersedes, amends or terminates provisions of the Convention either prior to the expiration of the five-year period or without the notification period. PROTOCOL 　　A Protocol accompanies and forms part of the Convention. The provisions of paragraphs I through V of the Protocol are discussed above in connection with Articles 5, 7, 10, 11, 12, 15, and 23 of the Convention. DIPLOMATIC NOTES 　　In diplomatic notes exchanged at the time the rest of the Convention was signed, the two governments confirmed their understandings with respect to several points. First, with respect to the United States position on tax sparing credits, it was agreed that, if the United States amends its laws to authorize such credits or grants such a credit in a tax treaty with another country, the Convention will be amended to incorporate such a credit The amended Convention would be subject to ratification. Second, as discussed above in connection with paragraph 4(c) of Article 5 (Permanent Establishment), the two governments confirmed their understandings with respect to the circumstances in which a person shall be considered to secure orders in a Contracting State wholly, or almost wholly, for an enterprise. Finally, as discussed above in connection with Article 12 (Royalties and Fees for Included Services), the two governments confirmed their understanding of the purpose of the memorandum of understanding developed and agreed upon by the negotiators, relating to the scope of included services under Article 12. June 14, 1990