GE GLOBAL PARTS & PRODUCTS GMBH,SWITZERLAND vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE INT TAX 1(3)(1), DELHI

ITA 1932/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 October 2025AY 2022-23Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)7 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the departmental authorities failed to consider the specific facts and evidence presented by the Assessee for the impugned assessment year, merely relying on past orders. The Tribunal found that the Assessee had demonstrated a substantial change in facts, including the vacation of office premises and no visit by expatriates, which were not controverted by the Revenue. Consequently, it was concluded that the Assessee did not have a PE in India.

What were the facts?

The Assessee appealed against the final assessment order for AY 2022-23, challenging the determination of a Permanent Establishment (PE) in India. The core issue was whether the Assessee had a PE in India during the assessment year.

What were the issues?

Whether the Assessee had a Permanent Establishment (PE) in India during the assessment year, considering a change in factual circumstances from previous years.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 144C(13),Section 285

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI

Before: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN & SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S.

For Appellant: Adv. & Sh. Arpit Goyal, CA
Hearing: 28/08/2025

PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the Final

Assessment Order dated 10/01/2025 passed u/s 143(3)

r.w.Section144C(13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' 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 2 GE Global Parts & Products Vs. ACIT Ld. Counsel further submitted that the said issue has been consider

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.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

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 144C(13)

All 3,426 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144C(13) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →