https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205587 The Revenue failed to establish that the Indian branch constituted a permanent establishment, because the record did not show that the assessee's own business was carried on through that fixed place or that the seconded personnel were employees rendering services on its behalf. The branch existed with RBI approval, but the evidence distinguished intended activities from actual operations and did not prove business activity in India during the year. In the absence of a permanent establishment under Article 5, attribution under Article 7 or Article 9 and any transfer pricing adjustment did not arise, and the assessee was not liable to tax in India for the year. en-us Fri, 14 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 Sep 2011 16:23:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205587 The Revenue failed to establish that the Indian branch constituted a permanent establishment, because the record did not show that the assessee's own business was carried on through that fixed place or that the seconded personnel were employees rendering services on its behalf. The branch existed with RBI approval, but the evidence distinguished intended activities from actual operations and did not prove business activity in India during the year. In the absence of a permanent establishment under Article 5, attribution under Article 7 or Article 9 and any transfer pricing adjustment did not arise, and the assessee was not liable to tax in India for the year. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 14 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205587