2024 (12) TMI 1781

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 2. At the outset, the Ld. counsel for the assessee before us submitted that he has been instructed by the assessee not to press ground No. 1, therefore we dismiss the same as not pressed. 3. The issue raised by the assessee on ground No. 2 and 3 is that the ld. DRP/AO erred in holding that the Indian subsidiary of the assessee is dependent agent permanent establishment of the assessee. 4. The necessary facts are that the assessee in the present case is a foreign company and engaged in the sale of software products. The assessee has subsidiary company in India namely Qliktech India private limited which has paid to the assessee a sum of Rs. 55,91,48,515 after deducting the TDS of Rs. 5,59,14,851 which was reflecting in form 26AS for ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....accepted in the assessment framed in the case of Indian subsidiary wherein such transaction of purchase and sale was made subject to TPO adjustment. 8. The ld. AR also submitted that the sale of software by the assessee company to its subsidiary company was duly recorded as the transaction of purchase and sale in the respective books of accounts. Therefore, the question of dependent agency permanent establishment does not arise. 9. On the other hand, the ld. DR vehemently supported the order of the authorities below. 10. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the materials available on record. On perusal of the order of the TPO in the case of the subsidiary company namely Qliktech India private limited,....