Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the reassessment proceedings and resulting assessment orders survived after the Supreme Court quashed the reassessment notices on the ground that, once the arm's length principle had been satisfied, no further profit attribution could be made on the basis of an alleged permanent establishment.
Analysis: The reassessment for the subject years had been founded on the allegation of a permanent establishment in India and the consequent attribution of income. The Tribunal noted that the Supreme Court had already quashed the reassessment notices in the connected matters, holding that where the arm's length principle has been satisfied, no further profit attribution can be made merely on the basis of a permanent establishment allegation. Since the reassessment orders under challenge arose from those notices, the foundation of the appeals no longer survived.
Conclusion: The reassessment orders could not be sustained and the appeals became infructuous.
Final Conclusion: The appeals were allowed because the reassessment notices had been quashed and the impugned reassessment orders ceased to have any operative basis.
Ratio Decidendi: When the arm's length principle has been accepted and the reassessment is founded only on a permanent establishment allegation, the reassessment notice and consequential order cannot survive.