TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the assessee had a permanent establishment in India under the applicable treaty provisions, and whether any part of its income from offshore supply of equipment was taxable or attributable to operations in India.
Analysis: The assessee had negotiated contracts through the Indian affiliate, but the record did not show that the liaison office or the Indian company was at the disposal of the assessee as a fixed place of business, or that it habitually concluded contracts on the assessee's behalf. The installation and commissioning work was found to have been performed under the separate services arrangement by the Indian company on its own account, and not by the assessee. The equipment supply obligation was treated as an offshore supply, with title passing outside India and consideration received for supply of goods, while no material established that the consideration covered any identifiable Indian operations performed by or on behalf of the assessee. Applying the principle that only income reasonably attributable to operations carried out in India can be taxed, the Court held that no part of the assessee's income from such supply could be brought to tax in India. As the assessee had no permanent establishment in India, attribution of profits to a permanent establishment also did not arise.
Conclusion: The existence of a permanent establishment in India was negatived, and the income from offshore supply was held not taxable in India.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
