https://www.taxtmi.com/css/info/rss_sitemap/rss_feed.css?v=1746094055 https://www.taxtmi.com Business/Tax/Law/GST/India/Taxation/Policies/Legal/Corporate Tax/Personal Tax/Vat Law/Legal Information/Tax Information/Legal Services/Tax Services Tax Management India. Com / MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd. All rights reserved. One stop solution for Direct Taxes and Indirect Taxes https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764847 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764847 Reopening of assessment - Income deemed to accrue or arise in India - Existence of a Permanent Establishment (PE) in India - whether the findings as recorded in the course of the 2007 or 2019 survey could have been blindly applied and adopted, extrapolated and read as being an accurate recordal of facts as they obtained in the AYs in question? - HELD THAT:- The position of a PE being a facts-specific issue and thus liable to be examined against the backdrop of what obtained in a particular tax period is one which is underscored even by the OECD Commentary on Article 5. It had been the consistent stand of the present writ petitioners that no PE had existed in the years in question. It is in the aforesaid light that we would have to evaluate and examine whether the findings as recorded in the course of the 2007 or 2019 survey could have been blindly applied and adopted, extrapolated and read as being an accurate recordal of facts as they obtained in the AYs in question. As conceded before us by the respondents that the reasons as recorded in support of the formation of opinion that income had escaped assessment had not alluded to any facts specific to AYs 2013-14 to 2017-18. Despite repeated queries respondents failed to draw our attention to any facet or fact pertaining to the AYs in question and which could have been read as demonstrative of an application of mind to the facts that prevailed or obtained in the years in question and thus justified a reassessment action being validly initiated. In fact, as we go through those reasons, it becomes more than apparent that the AO has merely proceeded to adopt and reiterate what was found in the course of the survey undertaken in 2007 and 2019 read alongside the judgment of this Court rendered in GE Energy [ 2019 (1) TMI 542 - DELHI HIGH COURT ] Indisputably, there is no principle akin to that of res judicata which can be recognized to be applicable to taxing disputes. Though this principle is well settled, we deem it appropriate to refer to the following enunciation of the well-settled legal position in National Petroleum Construction Co. [ 2022 (8) TMI 41 - SUPREME COURT ] The interplay between the principle of consistency and the facts of each year of assessment was lucidly explained by our Court in Galileo Nederland BV [ 2014 (8) TMI 902 - DELHI HIGH COURT ] It is in the aforesaid backdrop that the observations of the Supreme Court in CIT v Gupta Abhushan (P) Ltd [ 2008 (10) TMI 31 - DELHI HIGH COURT ] also assume significance and where it was unambiguously held that a survey report pertaining to a particular tax period cannot ipso facto be read or countenanced as being relevant and binding for independent assessment years as is evidenced from paragraph 6 of the report. The reassessment action is thus liable to be set aside. Decided in favour of assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 17 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530