DIT v. Morgan Stanley & Co.

KYOCERA DOCUMENT SOLUTIONS ASIA LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS KYOCERA MITA ASIA LIMITED),HONGKONG vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE INTT TAX 2(1)(2), DELHI, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

…is excessive. The role of PE, if any, is very limited. The ld. counsel for the assessee took another argument that the transaction is only bench marked in the TP document and hence, in accordance with the decision in the case of Morgan Stanley & Co (2007) 292 ITR 416(SC), E-Funds I T Solutions (2017) 399 ITR 34(SC), attribution cannot be made to the India PE. 16. The ld. counsel for the assessee emphasized that the onus was on the Assessing Officer to establish PE of the assessee which has not been discharged and no ingredient of PE is satisfied. He relied on the decision in the case of Zscaler Inc (2025)…

KYOCERA DOCUMENT SOLUTIONS ASIA LIMITED,HONG KONG vs. ACIT CIRCLE INT TAX 2(1)(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

…is excessive. The role of PE, if any, is very limited. The ld. counsel for the assessee took another argument that the transaction is only bench marked in the TP document and hence, in accordance with the decision in the case of Morgan Stanley & Co (2007) 292 ITR 416(SC), E-Funds I T Solutions (2017) 399 ITR 34(SC), attribution cannot be made to the India PE. 16. The ld. counsel for the assessee emphasized that the onus was on the Assessing Officer to establish PE of the assessee which has not been discharged and no ingredient of PE is satisfied. He relied on the decision in the case of Zscaler Inc (2025)…

KYOCERA DOCUMENT SOLUTIONS ASIA LTD.,(FORMERLY KNOWN AS KYOCERA MITA ASIA LIMITED),HONG KONG vs. ACIT, CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL TAX 2(1)(2), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

…is excessive. The role of PE, if any, is very limited. The ld. counsel for the assessee took another argument that the transaction is only bench marked in the TP document and hence, in accordance with the decision in the case of Morgan Stanley & Co (2007) 292 ITR 416(SC), E-Funds I T Solutions (2017) 399 ITR 34(SC), attribution cannot be made to the India PE. 16. The ld. counsel for the assessee emphasized that the onus was on the Assessing Officer to establish PE of the assessee which has not been discharged and no ingredient of PE is satisfied. He relied on the decision in the case of Zscaler Inc (2025)…

SAIC MOTOR CORPORATION LTD,CHINA vs. DCIT,INTERNATIONAL TAX, GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vimal Kumar & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2022-23] Saic Motor Corporation Assistant Commissioner Of Income Limited, Tax, International Taxation, Gurgaon, Room No.509, Building No.1, Vs Hsiidc Building, Vanijya Nikunj, Tower No.563, Songtao Road, Udyog Vihar, Phase-V, Gurgaon, Pilot Free Trade Zone, Sanghai, Haryana-122001 China, Pan-Abfcs0870H Assessee Revenue Assessee By Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Shri Kunal Pandey, Adv. Revenue By Shri Rohit Garg, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 10.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 07.01.2026 Order

…oes not arise since the foreign company is not rendering any services to any customer in India. ITA No.- 1191/Del/2025 SAIC Motor Corpora"on Ltd. Reference is further made to the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of DIT vs. Morgan Stanley & Co. Inc: 292 ITR 416, wherein the Court observed that the activities performed by the subsidiary of the assessee in India were only back office operations. Consequently, the second part of Article 5(1) (i.e. business activities of an enterprise are carried out wholly or in part through the fixed place) of the treaty was not satisfied and there was no fixed place PE i…

ORACLE SYSTEMS CORPORATION,NEW DELHI vs. DDIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeals in :

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘D’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1833/DEL/2009 [A.Y 2001-02] ITA No. 1834/DEL/2009 [A.Y 2002-03] ITA No. 1835/DEL/2009 [A.Y 2003-04] ITA No. 1836/DEL/2009 [A.Y 2004-05] ITA No. 3313/DEL/2013 [A.Y 2005-06] Oracle Systems Corporation Vs. The A.D.I.T Formerly known as Oracle Corporation Circle -2(1) C/o Pricewaterhouse Coopers Pvt Ltd International Taxation Sucheta Bhawan, Gate No. 2 New Delhi 2nd Floor, 11-A, Vishnu Digamber Marg New Delhi PAN : (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By :…

ORACLE SYSTEMS CORPORATION,NEW DELHI vs. ADIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeals in :

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘D’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1833/DEL/2009 [A.Y 2001-02] ITA No. 1834/DEL/2009 [A.Y 2002-03] ITA No. 1835/DEL/2009 [A.Y 2003-04] ITA No. 1836/DEL/2009 [A.Y 2004-05] ITA No. 3313/DEL/2013 [A.Y 2005-06] Oracle Systems Corporation Vs. The A.D.I.T Formerly known as Oracle Corporation Circle -2(1) C/o Pricewaterhouse Coopers Pvt Ltd International Taxation Sucheta Bhawan, Gate No. 2 New Delhi 2nd Floor, 11-A, Vishnu Digamber Marg New Delhi PAN : (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By :…

ORACLE SYSTEMS CORPORATION,NEW DELHI vs. ADIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeals in :

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘D’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1833/DEL/2009 [A.Y 2001-02] ITA No. 1834/DEL/2009 [A.Y 2002-03] ITA No. 1835/DEL/2009 [A.Y 2003-04] ITA No. 1836/DEL/2009 [A.Y 2004-05] ITA No. 3313/DEL/2013 [A.Y 2005-06] Oracle Systems Corporation Vs. The A.D.I.T Formerly known as Oracle Corporation Circle -2(1) C/o Pricewaterhouse Coopers Pvt Ltd International Taxation Sucheta Bhawan, Gate No. 2 New Delhi 2nd Floor, 11-A, Vishnu Digamber Marg New Delhi PAN : (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By :…

ORACLE SYSTEMS CORPORATION,NEW DELHI vs. ADIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeals in :

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘D’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1833/DEL/2009 [A.Y 2001-02] ITA No. 1834/DEL/2009 [A.Y 2002-03] ITA No. 1835/DEL/2009 [A.Y 2003-04] ITA No. 1836/DEL/2009 [A.Y 2004-05] ITA No. 3313/DEL/2013 [A.Y 2005-06] Oracle Systems Corporation Vs. The A.D.I.T Formerly known as Oracle Corporation Circle -2(1) C/o Pricewaterhouse Coopers Pvt Ltd International Taxation Sucheta Bhawan, Gate No. 2 New Delhi 2nd Floor, 11-A, Vishnu Digamber Marg New Delhi PAN : (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By :…

ORACLE SYSTEMS CORPORATION,NEW DELHI vs. ADIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeals in :

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘D’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1833/DEL/2009 [A.Y 2001-02] ITA No. 1834/DEL/2009 [A.Y 2002-03] ITA No. 1835/DEL/2009 [A.Y 2003-04] ITA No. 1836/DEL/2009 [A.Y 2004-05] ITA No. 3313/DEL/2013 [A.Y 2005-06] Oracle Systems Corporation Vs. The A.D.I.T Formerly known as Oracle Corporation Circle -2(1) C/o Pricewaterhouse Coopers Pvt Ltd International Taxation Sucheta Bhawan, Gate No. 2 New Delhi 2nd Floor, 11-A, Vishnu Digamber Marg New Delhi PAN : (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By :…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (INTERNATIONAL TAX-1), NEW DELHI vs. M/S EXL SERVICE.COM INC (PRESENTLY KNOWN AS EXL SERVICE COM LLC)

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR

…India has no authority to conclude any contract on behalf the US enter5pirse and all customers are based out of US and none of it is present in India. Reference is made to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Morgan Stanley & Co. Inc: 292 ITR 416 wherein it has been held as under: “MSC, a US based company was an investment bank engaged in business of providing financial advisory services, corporate lending and securities underwriting. It entered into an agreement with Morgan Stanley Advantage Services Pvt Ltd (‘MSAS’), a wholly owned Indian subsidiary for providing certain support…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-1), NEW DELHI vs. EXL SERVICE.COM INC (PRESENTLY KNOWN AS EXL SERVICE COM LLC)

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR

…India has no authority to conclude any contract on behalf the US enter5pirse and all customers are based out of US and none of it is present in India. Reference is made to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Morgan Stanley & Co. Inc: 292 ITR 416 wherein it has been held as under: “MSC, a US based company was an investment bank engaged in business of providing financial advisory services, corporate lending and securities underwriting. It entered into an agreement with Morgan Stanley Advantage Services Pvt Ltd (‘MSAS’), a wholly owned Indian subsidiary for providing certain support…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAX-1), NEW DELHI vs. EXL SERVICE.COM INC (PRESENTLY KNOWN AS EXL SERVICE COM LLC)

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR

…India has no authority to conclude any contract on behalf the US enter5pirse and all customers are based out of US and none of it is present in India. Reference is made to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Morgan Stanley & Co. Inc: 292 ITR 416 wherein it has been held as under: “MSC, a US based company was an investment bank engaged in business of providing financial advisory services, corporate lending and securities underwriting. It entered into an agreement with Morgan Stanley Advantage Services Pvt Ltd (‘MSAS’), a wholly owned Indian subsidiary for providing certain support…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-1, NEW DELHI vs. CLIFFORD CHANCE PTE LTD.

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: Us Is For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2020-21 & I.T.A. 353/2025 Is For Ay 2021-22.

…Page 11 of 30 19. He has submitted that the above judgment has been affirmed by the Supreme Court in ADIT v. E-Funds IT Solution Inc., [2017] 399 ITR 34 (SC), by relying upon another decision in DIT v. Morgan Stanley and Co., [2007] 292 ITR 416 (SC). It was observed by the Supreme Court that for constituting service permanent establishment of an enterprise in India, it is essential that such enterprise must furnish service “within India” through employees or other personnel. 20. According to Mr. Vohra, it becomes apparent from the above that: (i) The physical presence of the em…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-1, NEW DELHI vs. CLIFFORD CHANCE PTE LTD.

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: Us Is For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2020-21 & I.T.A. 353/2025 Is For Ay 2021-22.

…Page 11 of 30 19. He has submitted that the above judgment has been affirmed by the Supreme Court in ADIT v. E-Funds IT Solution Inc., [2017] 399 ITR 34 (SC), by relying upon another decision in DIT v. Morgan Stanley and Co., [2007] 292 ITR 416 (SC). It was observed by the Supreme Court that for constituting service permanent establishment of an enterprise in India, it is essential that such enterprise must furnish service “within India” through employees or other personnel. 20. According to Mr. Vohra, it becomes apparent from the above that: (i) The physical presence of the em…

LM WIND POWER AS ,DENMARK vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL TAX 2(2)(1), DELHI

In the result, ground raised by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Lm Wind Power As, Vs, Acit, Circle Juptervej 6, 6000 Kolding, International Tax 2(2)(1), Denmark – 999999. Delhi (Pan :Aabcl8590Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate Shri Aditya Vohra, Advocate Shri Arpitgoyal, Ca Revenue By : Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 27.08.2025 Date Of Order : 21.11.2025 Order Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appealpreferred By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Assessment Order Dated 27.01.2025 Passed By The Acit, Circle Int. Tax 2(2)(1), Delhi Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act”) For Assessment Year 2020-21 Pursuant To The Directions Of The Dispute Resolution Panel U/S 144C(5) Of The Act Raising Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Assessment Order Dated 29.07.2024 Passed Under Section 143(3) Read With Section 144C(13) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (He Act") For Assessment Year 2020-21 Assessing The Total Income Of The Assessee At Rs.81,14, 14,893 Is Bad In Law, Void- Ab-Initio & Therefore, Liable To Be Quashed And/ Or Set Aside.

…manner. The learned judges observed that PE connotes “a virtual projection of the foreign enterprise into the soil of another country. …………………………” (emphasis supplied) 17. He submitted that The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of DIT vs Morgan Stanley & Co: 292 ITR 416 (SC) while dealing with Article 5(1) of the India-USA DTAA, held as under: “Existence of P.E. in India With globalization, many economic activities spread over to several tax jurisdiction. This is where the concept of P.E. becomes important under article 5(1). There exists a P.E. if there is a fixed place through which the business of an enterpr…

CONCENTRIX CVG CUSTOMER MANAGEMENT GROUP INC. ,UNITED STATES OF AMERICA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(2)(1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, DELHI

In the result, the assessee’s both appeals are allowed as above

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraita No.7727/Del/2017, A.Y. 2013-14 Ita No.7924/Del/2018, A.Y. 2014-15 Ita No.1086/Del/2022, A.Y. 2017-18 Ita No.667/Del/2023, A.Y. 2018-19 Ita No.668/Del/2023, A.Y. 2019-20 Ita No.3512/Del/2023, A.Y. 2021-22 Ita No.1892/Del/2025, A.Y. 2022-23 Concentrix Cvg Customer Deputy Commissioner Management Group Inc., (Earlier Of Income Tax, Known As ‘Convergys Customer Vs Circle - 1(2)(1), Management Group Inc.’) International Taxation, C/O Pwc Pvt. Ltd., E-2 Tower, Civic Centre Sucheta Bhawan, Minto Road Gate No. 2, 1St Floor, New Delhi 11-A, Vishnu Digambar Marg, New Delhi Pan: Aaccc8989M (Appellant) (Respondent)

…l that the only one seconded employee was working under the control and supervision of CIS in AY 2013-14 and there was no seconded employee after AY 2014-15. The Ld. Sr. Counsel relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Morgan Stanley 292 ITR 416. 12. With respect to dependent agent PE, the Ld. Sr. Counsel contended that the CIS could not be considered to be a dependent agent PE of the assessee because the assessee had not rendered any service in India through CIS as agent. Further, it was submitted that the CIS was not authorized to or exercised any authority to conclude contracts on beh…

ACIT,CIRCLE 1(2)(1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI vs. CONCENTRIX CVG CUSTOMER MANAGEMENT GROUP INC., USA

In the result, the assessee’s both appeals are allowed as above

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraita No.7727/Del/2017, A.Y. 2013-14 Ita No.7924/Del/2018, A.Y. 2014-15 Ita No.1086/Del/2022, A.Y. 2017-18 Ita No.667/Del/2023, A.Y. 2018-19 Ita No.668/Del/2023, A.Y. 2019-20 Ita No.3512/Del/2023, A.Y. 2021-22 Ita No.1892/Del/2025, A.Y. 2022-23 Concentrix Cvg Customer Deputy Commissioner Management Group Inc., (Earlier Of Income Tax, Known As ‘Convergys Customer Vs Circle - 1(2)(1), Management Group Inc.’) International Taxation, C/O Pwc Pvt. Ltd., E-2 Tower, Civic Centre Sucheta Bhawan, Minto Road Gate No. 2, 1St Floor, New Delhi 11-A, Vishnu Digambar Marg, New Delhi Pan: Aaccc8989M (Appellant) (Respondent)

…l that the only one seconded employee was working under the control and supervision of CIS in AY 2013-14 and there was no seconded employee after AY 2014-15. The Ld. Sr. Counsel relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Morgan Stanley 292 ITR 416. 12. With respect to dependent agent PE, the Ld. Sr. Counsel contended that the CIS could not be considered to be a dependent agent PE of the assessee because the assessee had not rendered any service in India through CIS as agent. Further, it was submitted that the CIS was not authorized to or exercised any authority to conclude contracts on beh…

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(2)(1) INT. TAXATION, NEW DELHI vs. CONCENTRIX CVG CUSTOMER MANAGEMENT GROUP INC., USA

In the result, the assessee's both appeals are allowed as above

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

…l that the only one seconded employee was working under the control and supervision of CIS in AY 2013-14 and there was no seconded employee after AY 2014-15. The Ld. Sr. Counsel relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Morgan Stanley 292 ITR 416. 12. With respect to dependent agent PE, the Ld. Sr. Counsel contended that the CIS could not be considered to be a dependent agent PE of the assessee because the assessee had not rendered any service in India through CIS as agent. Further, it was submitted that the CIS was not authorized to or exercised any authority to conclude contracts on beh…

CONCENTRIX CVG CUSTOMER MANAGEMENT GROUP INC.,UNITED STATES vs. ACIT, (INT.TAXATION) 1(2)(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the assessee’s both appeals are allowed as above

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraita No.7727/Del/2017, A.Y. 2013-14 Ita No.7924/Del/2018, A.Y. 2014-15 Ita No.1086/Del/2022, A.Y. 2017-18 Ita No.667/Del/2023, A.Y. 2018-19 Ita No.668/Del/2023, A.Y. 2019-20 Ita No.3512/Del/2023, A.Y. 2021-22 Ita No.1892/Del/2025, A.Y. 2022-23 Concentrix Cvg Customer Deputy Commissioner Management Group Inc., (Earlier Of Income Tax, Known As ‘Convergys Customer Vs Circle - 1(2)(1), Management Group Inc.’) International Taxation, C/O Pwc Pvt. Ltd., E-2 Tower, Civic Centre Sucheta Bhawan, Minto Road Gate No. 2, 1St Floor, New Delhi 11-A, Vishnu Digambar Marg, New Delhi Pan: Aaccc8989M (Appellant) (Respondent)

…l that the only one seconded employee was working under the control and supervision of CIS in AY 2013-14 and there was no seconded employee after AY 2014-15. The Ld. Sr. Counsel relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Morgan Stanley 292 ITR 416. 12. With respect to dependent agent PE, the Ld. Sr. Counsel contended that the CIS could not be considered to be a dependent agent PE of the assessee because the assessee had not rendered any service in India through CIS as agent. Further, it was submitted that the CIS was not authorized to or exercised any authority to conclude contracts on beh…