| COURT: | ITAT Delhi |
| CORAM: | C. M. Garg (JM), G. D. Agrawal (VP) |
| SECTION(S): | 9, Article 7 |
| GENRE: | International Tax |
| CATCH WORDS: | attribution of profits to PE, PE, Permanent Establishment |
| COUNSEL: | M. P. Rastogi |
| DATE: | October 31, 2014 (Date of pronouncement) |
| DATE: | November 3, 2014 (Date of publication) |
| AY: | 2003-04 |
| FILE: | Click here to view full post with file download link |
| CITATION: | |
| (i) As the work done by the branch in India required high technical and managerial skill, it is not preparatory and auxiliary work of a back office but constitutes a permanent establishment (ii) Attribution of profits under Rule 10B(2) on the basis of the H.O's profits in the absence of data on uncontrolled transactions is proper, (iii) As risks were shared by the H.O. and the PE, 50% 50% of the profits determined as per rule 10 are attributable to operations carried out by the PE in India | |
(i) The benefit of the ratio of first part of Morgan Stanley and Co. Inc. (2007) 292 ITR 416 (SC) is not available for the assessee as on careful examination of activities and modus operandi of the assessee, we have …
Consulting Engineering Corporation vs. JDIT (ITAT Delhi) Read More »
Recent Comments