High Court held that where Liaison Office of assessee, a non-resident company, did not finalize and transact a business deal and activities carried out by LO could not be said to be preparatory or auxiliary in nature, LO did not constitute a Permanent Establishment, liable to tax in India..High Court also held that where MIPL was not performing additional function, in absence of material, it could not be taken as dependent agency PE to assessee liable to tax in India. There being gross delay of 395 days in filing this SLP, instant SLP was to be dismissed on ground of delay as well as on merits.
CIT v. Mitsui & Co. Ltd. (2024) 299 Taxman 365(SC) Editorial : CIT (IT) v.Mitsui & Co. Ltd (2024) 161 taxmann.com 634 (Delhi) (HC)
S. 9(1)(i) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Business connection-Liaison Office-Non-Resident company-Did not finalize and transact a business deal and activities-Liaison Office could not be said to be preparatory or auxiliary in nature, LO did not constitute Permanent Establishment of assessee-MIPL was not performing additional function, in absence of material, it could not be taken as dependant agency PE to assessee, a non-resident company-Delay of 395 days-SLP of Revenue is dismissed on account of delay as well as on merits-DTAA-India-Japan [art. 5, Art. 136]