TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (10) TMI 1221
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... for short) pertaining to Assessment Year 2022-23. 2. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the solitary issue to be considered in the present Appeal is as to whether the Assessee had PE in India during the Assessment Year under consideration or not. The Ld. Counsel further submitted that the said issue has been considered by the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in Assessee's own case for Assessment Year 2019-20 and 2018-19 in ITA No. 2033/Del/2022 vide order dated 25/07/2023 and other connected matters. Thus, sought for allowing the Appeal. 3. Per contra, the Ld. Departmental Representative submitted that other Judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court has not been considered by the Bench for Assessment Year 2018-19 and 2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd Hon'ble High Court in past assessment years, the departmental authorities have concluded the existence of PE without looking into or examining the facts and evidences brought on record, which are very much relevant for deciding the existence of PE in the impugned assessment years. It is observed, while deciding identical issue in case of NuovoPignone International SRL Vs. DCIT (supra) involving identical facts, the Coordinate Bench has held as under: "10. We have considered rival submissions and perused materials on record. We have also applied our mind to the judicial precedents cited before us. The short issue arising for consideration is whether the assessee had a PE, either fixed place PE or dependent agent PE, in India duri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on office has been closed were brought to the notice of the departmental authorities in course of proceedings to demonstrate that the reasons for which the departmental authorities as well as the Tribunal and Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court held existence of PE, no longer exists in the impugned assessment year. 12. This is clearly evident from the submissions made and documents filed before the departmental authorities. Despite such submissions and evidences produced by the assessee, the departmental authorities have remained oblivious to such facts and materials brought on record and proceeded to conclude existence of PE merely relying upon the past orders passed by them and higher appellate authorities. It is trite law, the exi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....verment of the assessee regarding vacation of office premises at AIFACS building and no visit by expatriates in India during the year, have not been controverted by the departmental authorities by any specific factual finding. In case of Blackstone Capital Partners (Singapore) VI FDI Three Pte. Ltd. (supra), Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court, while dealing with the issue of reopening of assessment based on information received from third party, observed, though such information can form basis for an examination/investigation by the Assessing Officer, but the decision to reopen the assessment has to be of the Assessing Officer and not of the third party. The Assessing Officer cannot merely do a cut and paste job for reopening the assessment ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pugned assessment year, it has to be concluded that the assessee did not have any PE, either fixed place PE or dependent agent PE, in India in the year under consideration. We again reiterate, our aforesaid conclusion is purely based on the facts involved in the impugned assessment year." 7. Akin to the case referred to above, in the facts of the present appeals also, the departmental authorities have failed to controvert either the submission or the materials and evidences brought on record by the assessee's to demonstrate that they did not have any PE in India in these assessment years. In fact, even at the stage of Tribunal, no contrary material has been brought on record by the Revenue to rebut the claim of the assessee's that ....