<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2020 (2) TMI 1733 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286277</link>
    <description>The High Court found in favor of the appellant, setting aside the remand order by the ITAT. The Court directed the Tribunal to limit its consideration to specific aspects without unnecessary remand, as all necessary facts and evidence were already before the ITAT. The Court emphasized that the issue of concession regarding the existence of a permanent establishment in India was a matter of record and should have been decided by the Tribunal without remanding it to the DRP.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 14 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 24 Feb 2020 14:21:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=604388" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (2) TMI 1733 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286277</link>
      <description>The High Court found in favor of the appellant, setting aside the remand order by the ITAT. The Court directed the Tribunal to limit its consideration to specific aspects without unnecessary remand, as all necessary facts and evidence were already before the ITAT. The Court emphasized that the issue of concession regarding the existence of a permanent establishment in India was a matter of record and should have been decided by the Tribunal without remanding it to the DRP.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 14 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286277</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>