Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Ishikawajima Harima Heavy Industries Ltd. v. DIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 234B, Section 9(1)(vii), Section 144C(13), Section 144C(5), Section 195.

Ishikawajima Harima Heavy Industries Ltd. v. DIT

Q: How many judgments cite Ishikawajima Harima Heavy Industries Ltd. v. DIT?

394 judgments on BharatTax cite Ishikawajima Harima Heavy Industries Ltd. v. DIT (288 ITR 408), spanning 2010 to 2026.

288 ITR 408Supreme Court of India2007#187 most cited

What is Ishikawajima Harima Heavy Industries Ltd. v. DIT authority for?

Income from offshore supply of goods and services is not taxable in India if the entire transaction, including transfer of ownership and payments, occurs outside India.

394

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 369,743 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Ishikawajima Harima Heavy Industries Ltd v DIT · Section 9(1)(vii) · Section 195 · Section 40(a)(i) · offshore supply of goods · offshore services · income taxable in India · non-resident taxation · make available clause · business connection

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 234B Section 9(1)(vii)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 195 Section 234A Section 40(a)(i)

Issues it is cited on

section 44bbb section 9(2)section 44bb section 44b section 195(1)make available clause section 9(1)(i)agency pe business connection fees for included services section 9(1)(vii)section 5(2)

Judgments citing Ishikawajima Harima Heavy Industries Ltd. v. DIT

Ciena India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 984/DEL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jun 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Ms. Reetika Garg (CA) &For Respondent: Sh. Surender Pal (Sr. DR)

Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: “B”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.- 959 & 984/Del/2011 (Assessment Years: 2007-08 & 2008-09) Ciena India Private Limited, Income Tax Officer, Plot No. 14, Sec-32 Echelon Vs. TDS Ward 1(1), Institutional Area, International tax, New Delhi. Gurgaon, Haryana 122001. PAN No: AACCC6131B APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Ms. Reetika Garg (CA) & Mr. Himanshu Sinha (Adv.) Revenue by : Sh. Surender Pal (Sr. DR) Date of Hearing : 29.05.2018. Date of Pronouncement : 29/06/2018. ORDER PER : O.P.KAN…

Ciena India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 959/DEL/2011[2007-08 (F.Y. 2006-07)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jun 2018

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Ms. Reetika Garg (CA) &For Respondent: Sh. Surender Pal (Sr. DR)

Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)

Nokia Net Works Nokia Group Finland vs. JCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the issues which have been remanded back by the Hon'ble High Court to this Tribunal stands decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue

ITA 1964/DEL/2001[1998-1999]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jun 2018AY 1998-1999

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini, Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, Amit SrivastavaFor Respondent: Shri T.M. Shiv Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 142(1)Section 3

…could be brought to tax in India giving the fact that no activity of off-shore supply was carried out in India. He further referred and relied upon the judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ishikawajima Harima Heavy Industries Ltd. vs. DIT (2007) 288 ITR 408 (SC); and CIT vs. Hyundai Heavy Industries Company Ltd. (2007) 291 ITR 482 (SC). Relying on these judgments, he submitted that if the taxability does not arise under the domestic law, i.e., under the provision of Income Tax Act itself, then there is no requirement to examine the provisions of DTAA. In this context, Ld. Counsel has relied upon the…

Nokia Net Works Nokia Gruop Finland vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the issues which have been remanded back by the Hon'ble High Court to this Tribunal stands decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue

ITA 1963/DEL/2001[1997-1998]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jun 2018AY 1997-1998

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini, Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, Amit SrivastavaFor Respondent: Shri T.M. Shiv Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 142(1)Section 3

DCIT (It) 2(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Daimler Ag (Formerly Known As Daimler Chrysler Ag), Mumbai

ITA 5704/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Dcit (It)-2(1)(2), M/S Daimler Ag Room No. 1713, 17Th Floor, C/O Srbc & Associates Llp बिधम/ Air India Building, 14Th Floor, The Ruby, Nariman Point, 29 Senapati Bapat Marg, Vs. Mumbai-400021 Dadar (W), Mumbai-400050 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aabcd2354C (अऩीराथी /Revenue) (प्रत्मथी / Assessee) :

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Lohia &For Respondent: Shri V. Vidhyadhar, Sr. D.R

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 5(2)Section 9(1)(i)

…form, the PE attributable to installation and commissioning came into existence only after the supply of the equipment. Therefore profits from supply of the platf orm did not accrue in India. Similarly in the case of Ishikawajima Harima Heavy ltd. Ltd. v DIT (288 ITR 408), the Apex court held that profit will not P a g e | 8 ITA No.5704/Mum/2016 AY. 2011-12 DCIT(IT)2(1)(2) Vs. M/s Daimler AG accrue in India in respect of offshore supply of equipment. The subsequent amendment to sect 9(1)(i) will not affect the decision on profit arising from sale of equipment offshore. Mere sale of raw materials/components will n…

Hitt Holland Institute of Traffice Technology B.V vs. DCIT, International Taxation 1(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 390/KOL/2015[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Apr 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 390/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Hitt Holland Institute Of Traffic Technology B.V -Vs- Dcit, International Taxation, (Now Known As “Saab Technologies B.V.). Circle-1(1), Kolkata [Pan: Aabch 5694 R] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Avisekh Kejriwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

…ment and services cannot be attributed to the Installation PE of the assessee in India. In this regard, we would like to place reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ishikawajima Harima Heavy Industries Limited vs DIT reported in 288 ITR 408 (SC) wherein it was clearly stated that in case the PE of a foreign company is not involved in any transaction carried out in India or outside India, no part of income earned from such transactions can be attributed to the PE in India. The Hon’ble Supreme Court held there has to be some activity through PE for attracting the taxing statute and ,…

Dorf Ketal Chemicals Llc, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 45, Mumbai

In the result, this appeal by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 4819/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Mar 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4819/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Dorf Ketal Chemicals Llc Dy. Cit, Central Circle-45, बनाम/ 1, Dorf Ketal Tower Orlem, Mumbai Vs. Malad (West), Mumbai-400 064 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaccd 1719 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Nishant Thakkar & Shri Hiten Chande ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Abhijit Patankar सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 16.01.2018 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 22.03.2018 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Dated 28.03.2013 & Pertains To The Assessment Year 2009- 10. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee, I.E., Dorf Ketal Chemicals Llc (Hereinafter Referred To As Dkllc) Is A 100% Subsidiary Of An Indian Company Dorf Ketal India Pvt. Ltd, (Herein After Referred To As Dkip). Dkllc Has Its Control & 2 M/S. Dorf Ketal Chemicals Llc Management In India & Therefore, The Dkllc, Apart From Being The Resident Of United States, Has Also Become Tax Resident In India By Virtue Of Its 100%

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar &For Respondent: Shri Abhijit Patankar

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 4Section 40Section 9

…al evidence may kindly be admitted in the interest of justice and fair play. 13. In this regard, the ld. Counsel of the assessee placed reliance upon the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Ishikawajima-Harima Heavy Industries Ltd. Vs. DIT [2007] 288 ITR 408 (S.C). He further relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Aktiengesellschaft Kuhnle Kopp and Kausch (2003) 262 ITR 513 (Mad). 14. Per contra, the ld. Departmental Representative relied upon the order of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of GVK Industries v ITO [(2015) 54 taxmann.com 347(SC). 15. We have…

DCIT 8(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Transameric Direct Marketing Consultants P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, as above

ITA 1978/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Mar 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ravish Sood: A.Y : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri M.V. RajguruFor Respondent: Shri Niraj Sheth/Mahek Gala

Section 143(3)Section 40

…e indeed been extracted by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order which also, inter-alia, contains reference and reliance on various decisions including that of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ishikawajima-Harima Heavy Industries Ltd. Vs. DIT, 228 ITR 408 (SC) and also the decision of the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of WNS North America Inc., ITA No. 8621/Mum/2010 dated 14.12.2012. However, the Assessing Officer, in a cryptic order, not accepted the submissions put forth by the assessee. The relevant discussion in the assessment order shows that the only point raised by the Assessing…

Atomstroyexport, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT (It) RG-1, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1000/MUM/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Feb 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm M/S. Atomstroyexport Vs. Additional Director Of Representative Assessee: Income Tax (It)-1, Mumbai Nuclear Power Corporation Of India Ltd., Vikram Sarabhai Bhavan Central Avenue Anushakti Nagar Mumbai – 400 094 Pan/Gir No.Aafca3658N Appellant) .. Respondent) Additional Director Of Vs. M/S. Atomstroyexport Income Tax (It)-1, Mumbai Representative Assessee: Nuclear Power Corporation Of India Ltd., Vikram Sarabhai Bhavan Central Avenue Anushakti Nagar Mumbai – 400 094 Pan/Gir No. Aafca3658N Appellant) .. Respondent)

For Appellant: Income Tax (IT)-1, Mumbai

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 195Section 195(2)Section 44Section 44B

…extracted herein below: “15.Therefore, after analyzing the various case laws, statutory provisions, DTAA provisions and contractual terms and respectfully following judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ishikawajima – Harima Heavy Industries Limited V/s DCIT (288 ITR 408), we are inclined to hold that Offshore Supply contracts were “carried and concluded” outside India and hence no income therefrom deemed to accrue or arise in India as per section 991) and DTAA provisions accordingly, not chargeable to tax. The receipts thereof do not form part of receipts for the purpose of computational provisions of section 44…

Landmark Graphics Corporation, New Delhi vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, Dehradun

In the result appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5285/DEL/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jan 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.K.Panda & Smt. Beena A Pillaia.Y. 2007-08 Landmark Graphics Adit Corporation Vs. International C/O Nangia & Company, Ca Taxation Suite 4 A, Plaza M 6 Subhash Road Jasola Dehradun 248 001 New Delhi 110 025 Pan: Aabcl1012F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Amit Arora & Sh. Vishal Misra, Cas Respondent By Sh. Gk Dhall, Cit,Dr Date Of Hearing 11.01.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 18.01.18 Order Per Beena A Pillai

Section 143(3)Section 209(1)(d)Section 234BSection 44Section 9(1)(vi)

…ware which was in connection with the exploration/extraction of mineral oils in India, the Assessing Officer was not right by applying 15% of rate by applying decision of Advance Authority Ruling in case of Ishikawajima Harima Heavy Industries Co. Ltd Vs. DIT 271 ITR 193 as the facts of the said case is different from that of the present appeals. Thus, for subsequent years the issue of permanent establishment is not in question and hence the applicability of the judgement of ONGC is very much necessary as all these activities which assessee took are coming under the purview of Section 44BB.” 2.4. On the contrary…

Sedco Forex International Inc. Thr. Its Constituted Attorney Mr. Navin Sarda vs. Commissioner of Income Tax Meerut

C.A. No.-004906-004906 - 2010Supreme Court30 Oct 2017

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI

Section 44B

…rinciple of apportionment between India and outside India is a basic principle of income tax law. Where payments are made to a non-resident outside India, for services rendered outside India, 3 (1986) 159 ITR 203 4 (1954) 25 ITR 27 (SC) 5 (2007) 288 ITR 408 (SC) = (2007) 3 SCC 481) 6 (1977) 108 ITR 335 (SC) 7 (1966) 60 ITR 11 (SC) 19 namely mobilization charges for drilling rigs from a foreign location to a location in India, the same is not chargeable to tax in India under Sections 5 and 9 of the Act and the same cannot be made chargeable to tax under Section 44BB of the Act. (b)…

DCIT (It) -4(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Vitk0Vice Machinery A.S.(Crech Republic), Mumbai

ITA 1673/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Oct 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Sh. Rajendra & Ravish Soodआयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./Ita./1673/Mum/2015,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2011-12 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Dcit (Intl, Taxation)-4(3)(1), M/S. Vitkovice Machinery A.S. Room No.116, Scindia House, Level-9, The Ruby Northwest Wing Ballard Pier, N.M. Road Vs. Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar (W) Mumbai-400 038. Mumbai-400 028. Pan:Aadcv 2727 K (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Samuel Darse-Cit-Dr Assessee By: Shri Jigar Saiya सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 06.09.2017 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 27.10.2017 आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम िधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयकर आयकर िधिनयम िधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार अनुसार /Per Rajendra, Am- लेखा लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Challenging The Directions,Dated 23/12/2014,Of The Dispute Resolution Panel (Drp)-Ii, Mumbai, The Assessing Officer(Ao)Has Filed The Present Appeal.Assessee,A Non-Resident Foreign Company, Filed Its Return Of Income On 26/11/2011,Declaring Total Income Of Rs. 55.15 Lakhs, The Ao Completed The Assessment U/S.144C(13) R.W.S.143(3)Of The Act,On 21/01/2015,Assessed Its Income At Rs. 55, 15, 418/-.

For Appellant: Shri Jigar SaiyaFor Respondent: Shri Samuel Darse-CIT-DR

Section 144C(13)Section 254(1)Section 9

…tion in India, that it could not be concluded that contract provided a business connection in India, that the offshore supplies could not be brought to tax under the provisions of the Act. The DRP referred to the cases of Ishikawajima Harima Heavy Industries (288 ITR 408) and Hyundai Heavy Industries (291 ITR 482) of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and stated that facts of the case of consideration were similar to the facts Ishikawajima (supra) wherein the Hon’ble apex court had held that offshore supplies were not taxable in India,that it was not having a business connection in India, that the offshore supplies could…

ADIT, Noida vs. M/S. Global Thermoelectric Inc India Project Office, New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeal of the Revenue pertaining to penalty for A

ITA 5586/DEL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Oct 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: : Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 144CSection 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 44B

…aforesaid appeals. In Income Tax Appeal No. 80/2007, which is the departmental appeal, the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court, after following the Supreme Court judgment in the case of Ishika Vazima-Harima Heavy Industries Ltd. vs. Director of Income Tax, Mumbai in 288 ITR 408 , [2007] 3 SCC 481, held that the contract was a divisible contract and the equipments which were manufactured and supplied outside India on FOB basis, the assessee was not liable to pay any tax in India as there was no element of sale at all in India and then dismissed the departmental appeal. The assessee’s appeal being Income Tax Appeal No. 42…

Global Thermoelectric Inc., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, Noida

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeal of the Revenue pertaining to penalty for A

ITA 1364/DEL/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Oct 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: : Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 144CSection 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 44B

M/S. Nortel Networks India International Inc., Gurgaon vs. DDIT, New Delhi

ITA 1087/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N.K.Saini & Sh.K.N.Charry

Section 143(3)

…ivity carried out in India relating to the off shore supplies, vide Paragraphs 45 to 50, having considered the Services Contract in the light of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ishikawajma-Harima Heavy Industries Ltd. v. DIT [2007] 288 ITR 408/158 Taxman 259, in assessee’s case, the Hon’ble High Court found that the task of installation, commissioning and testing was contracted to Nortel ITA Nos. 3313 to 3315/Del/2012 & 1087/Del/2014 C.O.Nos.-21 to 24/Del/2017 India and thus, the operations pertaining to installation and commissioning were not performed by Nortel India on behalf of t…

M/S Nortal Networks India International Inc., Gurgaon vs. ADIT, New Delhi

ITA 3315/DEL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. N.K.Saini & Sh.K.N.Charry

Section 143(3)

M/S Nortal Networks India International Inc., Gurgaon vs. ADIT, New Delhi

ITA 3313/DEL/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Sept 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. N.K.Saini & Sh.K.N.Charry

Section 143(3)

Atomstroyexport, Russia, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) RG 1(1)(2), Mumbai

ITA 619/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Sept 2017AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi -ARFor Respondent: Shri Samuel Darse-CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 44B

…M/17 M/s.Atomstroyexport "15 Therefore after analyzing the various case laws, statutory provisfonc, DTA/ provisions and contractual terms and respectfully following judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ishikawajima- Harirna Heavy Industries Limited V/s DICT (288 ITR 408),we are inclined to hold that Offshore Supply contracts were 'carried and concluded-"outside India and hence no income therefrom deemed to accrue or arise in India as per section 9(1) and DTAA provisions and accordingly, not chargeable to tax. The receipts thereof do not form part of receipts for the purpose of computational provisions of section…

Viacom 18 Media Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It)-4(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 3776/MUM/2015[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Aug 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm

For Appellant: Ms.Armaity IchhaporiaFor Respondent: Shri M.V.Rajguru (Sr.DR)

Section 195Section 195(2)Section 9(1)Section 9(1)(vi)

…ify as 'royalty', as defined in Explanation 2 to Section 9(l)fvi) of the income Tax Act. As seen from the facts, the said judgment was rendered in the year 2011, much before the amendment under Finance Act, 2012. Further after the decision reported in [[2007] 288 ITR 408 (lahikawajama-Harima Heavy Industries Lid. v. Director of Income Tax} an explanation was inserted below subsection 2 of Section 9, with effect from 01.06.1976 under Finance Act. 2007 to get over the decision of the Supreme Court. Flence this decision of the Delhi High Court is distinguishable and has no 23 ITA No.3776/Mum/2015. M/s.Viacom 18 Medi…

ADIT(Intl. Taxation), Dehradun vs. M/S. Landmarks Graphics Corporation, Usa, Dehradun

ITA 1180/DEL/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R. S. Syal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 268A

…ware which was in connection with the exploration/extraction of mineral oils in India, the Assessing Officer was not right by applying 15% of rate by applying decision of Advance Authority Ruling in case of Ishikawajima Harima Heavy Industries Co. Ltd Vs. DIT 271 ITR 193 as the facts of the said case is different from that of the present appeals. Thus, for subsequent years the issue of permanent establishment is not in question and hence the activities which assessee took are coming under the purview of Section 44BB. The Assessing Officer is therefore, directed to tax the income of the assessee as per Section 44B…