{"id":20755,"date":"2021-08-05T16:09:13","date_gmt":"2021-08-05T10:39:13","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/inmarsat-global-ltd-v-dcit-2021-187-itd-157-mum-trib\/"},"modified":"2021-08-05T16:09:13","modified_gmt":"2021-08-05T10:39:13","slug":"inmarsat-global-ltd-v-dcit-2021-187-itd-157-mum-trib","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/inmarsat-global-ltd-v-dcit-2021-187-itd-157-mum-trib\/","title":{"rendered":"Inmarsat Global Ltd. v. DCIT (2021) 187 ITD 157 (Mum.)(Trib.)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Assessee, a UK based company, was engaged in business of providing telecommunication services and leasing of space segment capacity of navigational transponder.\u00a0 It had entered into an agreement with Tata Communications Ltd. for providing satellite telecommunication services.\u00a0 The Assessing Officer assessed the total receipt as royalty subjected to tax @ 10%. DRP up held the order of the Assessing Officer. On appeal The Tribunal held that amount received by assessee from providing Satellite Telecommunication services to Tata Communications Ltd\u00a0\u00a0 was not to be treated as royalty. \u00a0Assessing Officer held that assessee had a PE in India on two grounds, that Liaison Office (LO) of assessee constituted its PE in India; and that Land Earth Stations (LES) also constituted PE of assessee in India.\u00a0 DRP up held the order of the Assessing Officer. On appeal The Tribunal held that activities on behalf of assessee and there were no income generating activities carried out by Liaison\u00a0 Office\u00a0 in India on facts, Liaisons\u00a0 office\u00a0\u00a0 could not be treated as PE of assessee.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 (AY. 2015-16)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>S. 9(1)(vi) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Royalty-Satellite Telecommunication Services-Not to be  assessed as  royalty-liaison and coordination activities-Cannot be treated as permanent establishment-DTAA-India-UK. [S. 9(1)(i),  Art. 13].<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-20755","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-5oL","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/20755","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=20755"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/20755\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":20756,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/20755\/revisions\/20756"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=20755"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=20755"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=20755"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}