Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
- ⚖️ Instantly identify judgments decided in favour of the Assessee, Revenue, or Appellant
- 🔍 Narrow down results with higher precision
Try it now in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New Feature Launched ✕
Just a moment...
Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
Try it now in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Highlights
of of All Highlights
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of The HC held that the activities of the assessee in India were of the nature specified in Article 5(4) of the DTAA between India and Korea, and consequently there was no PE in India. The HC agreed with the Tribunal's view that the secondment of employees did not create a deemed PE, as the seconded employees were not discharging functions or performing activities connected with the global enterprise of the assessee. Their placement in India was to facilitate the activities of SIEL. The HC found no error in the Tribunal's decision that a deemed PE had not come into being merely due to the secondment of employees.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
