ORPAK SYSTEMS LTD.,PUNE vs. DY.D.I.T. (I.T.)-4(2), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 8863/MUM/2011Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 January 2016AY 2008-0913 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the contract was composite and the assessee had a Permanent Establishment in India. However, it remanded the issue of profit attribution to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination.

What were the facts?

An Israeli company received payments for supplying equipment and installation services for an Indian company's retail outlets. The assessee treated the contract as divisible, claiming offshore supply income was not taxable in India. The revenue authorities considered it a composite contract with a Permanent Establishment in India.

What were the issues?

Whether the contract was composite or divisible, and whether the assessee had a Permanent Establishment in India.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

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

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show 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.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “L” BENCH, MUMBAI

For Respondent: Shri Tasbir S Chauhan
Hearing: 8.10.2015

आदेश की प्रतिलऱपप अग्रेपिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अऩीरधथी / The Appellant 1. प्रत्मथी / The Respondent. 2. आमकय आमुक्त(अऩीर) / The CIT(A)- concerned 3. आमकय आमुक्त / CIT concerned 4. ववबधगीम प्रनतननधध, आमकय अऩीरीम अधधकयण, भुंफई / 5. DR, ITAT, Mumbai concerned गधर्ा पधईर / Guard file. 6. आदेशधनुसधय/ BY ORDER, True copy सहधमक ऩंजीकधय (Asstt. Registrar) आमकय अऩीरीम अधधकयण, भुंफई /ITAT, Mumbai

आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ “एल” म ुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL“L” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE S/SHRI B.R.BASKARAN, AM AND PAWAN SINGH, JM आमकय अऩीर सं./ (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year:2008-09) बनाम/ M/s Orpak Systems Ltd., Asstt. Director of Income Tax (IT) 615, South Tower, 4(2), Vs. Sacred World, Mumbai. Wanaworie, Pune-411040 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

स्थधमी रेखध सं./जीआइआय सं./PAN. :AAACO8179P

अऩीरधथी ओय से / Appellant by Shri Sharad A Shah प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent by Shri Jasbir S Chauhan

CORRIGENDUM

The Tribunal has passed order in this appeal on 6.1.2016 and in the column of appearance, the name of the Departmental Representative inadvertently has been mentioned as “Shri Tasbir S. Chauhan”. By way of this corrigendum, we replace the name of ld.DR and this may be read as “Shri Jasbir S Chauhan”. Sd sd (PAWAN SINGH) ( B.R. BASKARAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER भुंफई Mumbai: 22nd Feb, 2016. व.नन.स./ SRL , Sr. PS

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 →