Progress Rail Locomotive Inc. v. DCIT

466 ITR 76High Court2024#12866 most cited
8

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2025 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 234BSection 9(1)(vi)Section 234ASection 92Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 5Section 9(1)(i)

Issues it is cited on

profit split methodfixed place peservice peagency pecost plus methodfees for included servicesroyalty incomeright to receivesection 9(1)(vi)permanent establishmentinterest u/s 234bsection 9(1)

Judgments citing Progress Rail Locomotive Inc. v. DCIT

BOOKING.COM B.V.,THE NETHERLANDS vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 1(1)(2), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2033/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarbooking.Com B.V. Vs. Acit, Circle -1(1)(2) Oosterdokskade 163, International Taxation, 1011 Dl, Amsterdam, The Civic Centre, Minto Road, Netherlands, New Delhi – 110002 Haryana 122002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aagcb2395A Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. M.S. Nethrapal, CIT, DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 151

…hed such a link between the tangible material/ information relied upon (i.e., taxes withheld by the Accommodations) and the inference drawn that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. 24. In the case of Progress Rail Locomotive Inc. v. DCIT [2024] 466 ITR 76 (Delhi), the Hon'ble Delhi High Court quashed the reassessment proceedings. 25. Ld. Departmental Representative submitted that it is to state that the above two decisions still hold good and issue of PE and attribution of 15% of income to such PE has been upheld by higher courts in case of Galileo and P a g e | 14 Booking.com B.V. (AY: 2018-19)…

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

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

ITA 1191/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2026AY 2022-23

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

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 153(1)

…oreign Associated Enterprise are found to have taken place at arms’ length prices, then there is no question of attributing any income to the PE. Specific reliance is placed on the decision of Delhi High Court in case of Progress Rail Locomo"ve Inc. vs. DCIT: 466 ITR 76, where on facts the assessee had a wholly owned subsidiary in India which owned a manufacturing unit/factory at Noida and an office at Varanasi. The AO alleged that the Noida factory of the assessee’s subsidiary is a fixed place PE of the assessee in India. The High Court in the said ruling extensively dealt with the Apex court rulings in the case…

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

In the result, assessee’s appeals in :

ITA 3313/DEL/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jan 2026AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri G.C. Srivastava, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Indruj Sngh Rai, Spl. Counsel
Section 234ASection 250(1)(a)Section 9(1)(vi)

…sumption of Revenue. Further, we do not find any assertion of the AO that the assessee has deployed and posted its personnel in OIPL who were performing services for the OIPL, as was required by the Delhi High Court in the case of Progress Rail Locomotive Inc 466 ITR 76(Del). The hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Adobe System (supra) had held that when no material is available with AO to substantiate that Foreign Company's employees have rendered services in India, inference cannot be drawn that assessee has a PE in terms of Article 5(2)(l) of the India-USA DTAA. The Stewardship activities of the assessee,…

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

In the result, assessee’s appeals in :

ITA 1836/DEL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jan 2026AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri G.C. Srivastava, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Indruj Sngh Rai, Spl. Counsel
Section 234ASection 250(1)(a)Section 9(1)(vi)

…sumption of Revenue. Further, we do not find any assertion of the AO that the assessee has deployed and posted its personnel in OIPL who were performing services for the OIPL, as was required by the Delhi High Court in the case of Progress Rail Locomotive Inc 466 ITR 76(Del). The hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Adobe System (supra) had held that when no material is available with AO to substantiate that Foreign Company's employees have rendered services in India, inference cannot be drawn that assessee has a PE in terms of Article 5(2)(l) of the India-USA DTAA. The Stewardship activities of the assessee,…

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

In the result, assessee’s appeals in :

ITA 1835/DEL/2009[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jan 2026AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri G.C. Srivastava, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Indruj Sngh Rai, Spl. Counsel
Section 234ASection 250(1)(a)Section 9(1)(vi)

…sumption of Revenue. Further, we do not find any assertion of the AO that the assessee has deployed and posted its personnel in OIPL who were performing services for the OIPL, as was required by the Delhi High Court in the case of Progress Rail Locomotive Inc 466 ITR 76(Del). The hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Adobe System (supra) had held that when no material is available with AO to substantiate that Foreign Company's employees have rendered services in India, inference cannot be drawn that assessee has a PE in terms of Article 5(2)(l) of the India-USA DTAA. The Stewardship activities of the assessee,…

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

In the result, assessee’s appeals in :

ITA 1834/DEL/2009[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jan 2026AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri G.C. Srivastava, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Indruj Sngh Rai, Spl. Counsel
Section 234ASection 250(1)(a)Section 9(1)(vi)

…sumption of Revenue. Further, we do not find any assertion of the AO that the assessee has deployed and posted its personnel in OIPL who were performing services for the OIPL, as was required by the Delhi High Court in the case of Progress Rail Locomotive Inc 466 ITR 76(Del). The hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Adobe System (supra) had held that when no material is available with AO to substantiate that Foreign Company's employees have rendered services in India, inference cannot be drawn that assessee has a PE in terms of Article 5(2)(l) of the India-USA DTAA. The Stewardship activities of the assessee,…

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

In the result, assessee’s appeals in :

ITA 1833/DEL/2009[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jan 2026AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri G.C. Srivastava, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Indruj Sngh Rai, Spl. Counsel
Section 234ASection 250(1)(a)Section 9(1)(vi)

…sumption of Revenue. Further, we do not find any assertion of the AO that the assessee has deployed and posted its personnel in OIPL who were performing services for the OIPL, as was required by the Delhi High Court in the case of Progress Rail Locomotive Inc 466 ITR 76(Del). The hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Adobe System (supra) had held that when no material is available with AO to substantiate that Foreign Company's employees have rendered services in India, inference cannot be drawn that assessee has a PE in terms of Article 5(2)(l) of the India-USA DTAA. The Stewardship activities of the assessee,…

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

ITA 4280/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

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.

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 271ASection 44DSection 5Section 92C

…i High Court in the case of Nortel Networks India International Incvs DIT: 386 ITR 353 (Del). Further, in this regard, he placed reliance on the recent decision passed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Progress Rail Locomotive Inc vs DCIT: [2024] 466 ITR 76 (Del). 22. He submitted that Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of DIT vs Western Union Financial Services Inc (Del): [2025] 472 ITR 220 (Del), following the decision in the case of Progress Rail (supra) held as under: “49. For the purposes of being acknowledged as a PE, the said office would have had to qualify the provisions of sub-paras 1 an…

Progress Rail Locomotive Inc. v. DCIT (466 ITR 76) — Cited in 8 Judgments | BharatTax