GULF PIPING COMPANY WLL,ABU DHABI vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), DEHRADUN
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the revenue was not taxable in India as the services were rendered entirely in UAE and the assessee did not have a Permanent Establishment (PE) in India. The Tribunal also noted that the India-UAE DTAA does not have a specific clause for FTS.
What were the facts?
The assessee, a UAE-based company, provided construction services for an oil rig in Dubai for ONGC. The revenue generated from these services was held taxable in India as Fee for Technical Services (FTS) by the lower authorities.
What were the issues?
Whether revenue from construction services rendered outside India to an Indian company is taxable in India as FTS, and whether such income is taxable in the absence of a PE in India and a specific FTS clause in the DTAA.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(4)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- S.A. Builders Ltd. v. CIT1,484 citing288 ITR 1 · 2007 · SC · Read judgment
- GE India Technology Centre Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT663 citing327 ITR 456 · 2010 · SC · Read judgment
- Bangkok Glass Industry Co. Ltd. v. ACIT37 citing34 Taxmann.com 77 · 2013 · HC
- Kingfisher Airlines Ltd. v. DDIT4 citing179 ITD 364 · ITAT
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DEHRADUN BENCH, DEHRADUN
Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman
Heard together (3 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:
These assessee’s three appeals ITA Nos. 71 & 81/DDN/2024 for A.Ys. 2020-21 and 2021-22 arise against the Assessing Officer’s assessment order dated 11.11.2022 and 24.08.2023 and ITA Nos. 83/DDN/2025 for A.Y. 2022-23, is directed against the Assessing Officer’s assessment order dated 23.12.2024, in proceedings u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”), respectively.
Heard both the parties at length. Case files perused.
It transpires during the cours
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 9(1)(vii)
- Mitsubishi Electric Europe B.V., Netherlands vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, New…ITA 1948/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2022-23
- Sabre Marketing Nederland, Bv., Netherlands vs ACIT, Circle-3(1)(2), Int. Tax., New DelhiITA 1697/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2019-20
- Sabre Marketing Nederland, Bv., Netherlands vs ACIT, Circle-3(1)(2), Int. Tax., New DelhiITA 1696/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
- Eurofins Peenya Resources Private Limited… vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 1116/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2016-17
- Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 8… vs Aquapharm Chemicals Pvt. Ltd., PuneITA 2150/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: Disposed25 Sept 2026AY 2016-17
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Utkal Highways, Bidanasi vs. Union Of INDIAOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Pradeep Kumar Behera vs. Superintendent CGST And Central Excise., CuttackOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Manas Behera vs. Commissioner, CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Pramod Kumar Nayak vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, KendraparaOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Nirmal Kumar Sharma S/O Ram Swroop Sharma vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 16 Oct 2026