Rolls Royce PLC v. DIT

339 ITR 147High Court2011#4198 most cited

What is Rolls Royce PLC v. DIT authority for?

Profits arising from the sale of sub-assemblies and intermediary services should not be attributed to a Permanent Establishment (PE) at an ad-hoc rate if the facts of the appellant's case are different from those in Rolls Royce PLC. Attributing profits to a PE requires careful consideration of the specific transactions and activities.

28

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2024.

Also referred to as

Rolls Royce PLC v. DIT · 339 ITR 147 · Permanent Establishment · PE · attribution of profits · sub-assemblies · intermediary services · tax treaty · non-resident · Delhi High Court

Issues it is cited on

fixed place petax treatypermanent establishmentinternational transactiondouble taxationnon-residentprevious yeartransfersection 143companyindiabusiness

Judgments citing Rolls Royce PLC v. DIT

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Canon India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 2275/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92B

…emise of transfer pricing, as the intend of the legislature under transfer pricing is, that controlled transaction is to be compared with uncontrolled transaction. The Ld. AR submitted that the TPO placed reliance on the decision of the Rolls Royce Plc [2011] 339 ITR 147 (Delhi) for the purpose of attributing global profit to the various functions undertaken by Canon Inc. The TPO, accordingly attributed the global profits in the following ratio: Manufacturing - 50 percent > Research and development - 15 percent > AMP - 35 percent > 42. In view of the above, the Ld. AR submitted that the TPO incorrectly applied…

Canon India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1405/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92B

…emise of transfer pricing, as the intend of the legislature under transfer pricing is, that controlled transaction is to be compared with uncontrolled transaction. The Ld. AR submitted that the TPO placed reliance on the decision of the Rolls Royce Plc [2011] 339 ITR 147 (Delhi) for the purpose of attributing global profit to the various functions undertaken by Canon Inc. The TPO, accordingly attributed the global profits in the following ratio: Manufacturing - 50 percent > Research and development - 15 percent > AMP - 35 percent > 42. In view of the above, the Ld. AR submitted that the TPO incorrectly applied…

DDIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Nipro Asia Pte. Ltd., Satara

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 4078/DEL/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year : 2003-04

For Appellant: Shri Kishor Phadke, CAFor Respondent: Shri Neeraj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 44CSection 9(1)Section 92E

…i Bench of the Tribunal in Rolls Royce PLC vs. DDIT 2007-TII-32-ITAT-DEL-INTL, has applied 35% of 10% 14 of the total profit as pertaining to marketing activities, which stands affirmed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Rolls Royce PLC vs. DIT(IT) (2011) 339 ITR 147 (Del). It is further noted that the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in ZTE Corporation vs. Addl. DIT (2016) 159 ITD 696 (Del) has also attributed 35% of the profits attributable to marketing activities in India. It is still further noted that the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in G.E. Energy Parts Inc. VS. ADIT in ITA No.671/Del/2011, after consider…

Hero Motocorp Limited, New Delhi vs. JCIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1545/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. I. C. Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishihero Motocorp Limited, Jcit, 34, Basant Lok, Vasant Range-1, New Delhi Vs. Vihar, New Delhi Pan: Aaach0812J (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community Vs. New Delhi Centre, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110057 (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. NC Sawain, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

…incurring common corporate expenses pertaining to the overall business, could not be said to be a separate profit centre. ix) The decision of Rolls Royce Plc. DDIT: 113 TTJ 446, as relied upon the AO, subsequently affirmed by the Delhi High Court, reported at 339 ITR 147 (Delhi), has no application to the facts under consideration. In the aforesaid decision, the issue was of attribution of profits earned by the foreign company to operations carried out in India, as per the provisions of section 9(1)(i) read with Article 7 of Indo-UK Treaty, which were taxable in India. In the aforesaid situation, the segregation…

M/S. Zte Corporation, Gurgaon vs. ADIT, New Delhi

In the result, this ground is

ITA 1109/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Smt. Beena A. Pillai:

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Sharma CIT(DR)
Section 133ASection 139Section 148

…. CIT(A) attributed 50% of the profits to the activities of PE in India which was upheld by Tribunal. 46 ITA 5870/Del/12 & ors. – ZTE Corporation 40. Ld. CIT(DR) further referred to the decision in the case of Rolls Royce PLC Vs. DIT International taxation 339 ITR 147 (Del), wherein the Hon’ble Delhi High Court approved 35% profits attributable to PE on account of marketing activities in India. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court observed as under: “While restricting the attribution to 35 per cent, the reason given by the Tribunal was that profit attributed to manufacturing activity and R&D activities i. e. 50 per…

DDIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Zte Corporation

In the result, this ground is

ITA 5974/DEL/2012[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Smt. Beena A. Pillai:

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Sharma CIT(DR)
Section 133ASection 139Section 148

…. CIT(A) attributed 50% of the profits to the activities of PE in India which was upheld by Tribunal. 46 ITA 5870/Del/12 & ors. – ZTE Corporation 40. Ld. CIT(DR) further referred to the decision in the case of Rolls Royce PLC Vs. DIT International taxation 339 ITR 147 (Del), wherein the Hon’ble Delhi High Court approved 35% profits attributable to PE on account of marketing activities in India. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court observed as under: “While restricting the attribution to 35 per cent, the reason given by the Tribunal was that profit attributed to manufacturing activity and R&D activities i. e. 50 per…

Zte Corporation vs. ADIT, New Delhi

In the result, this ground is

ITA 5871/DEL/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Smt. Beena A. Pillai:

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Sharma CIT(DR)
Section 133ASection 139Section 148

…. CIT(A) attributed 50% of the profits to the activities of PE in India which was upheld by Tribunal. 46 ITA 5870/Del/12 & ors. – ZTE Corporation 40. Ld. CIT(DR) further referred to the decision in the case of Rolls Royce PLC Vs. DIT International taxation 339 ITR 147 (Del), wherein the Hon’ble Delhi High Court approved 35% profits attributable to PE on account of marketing activities in India. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court observed as under: “While restricting the attribution to 35 per cent, the reason given by the Tribunal was that profit attributed to manufacturing activity and R&D activities i. e. 50 per…

Zte Corporation vs. ADIT, New Delhi

In the result, this ground is

ITA 5870/DEL/2012[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Smt. Beena A. Pillai:

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Sharma CIT(DR)
Section 133ASection 139Section 148

…. CIT(A) attributed 50% of the profits to the activities of PE in India which was upheld by Tribunal. 46 ITA 5870/Del/12 & ors. – ZTE Corporation 40. Ld. CIT(DR) further referred to the decision in the case of Rolls Royce PLC Vs. DIT International taxation 339 ITR 147 (Del), wherein the Hon’ble Delhi High Court approved 35% profits attributable to PE on account of marketing activities in India. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court observed as under: “While restricting the attribution to 35 per cent, the reason given by the Tribunal was that profit attributed to manufacturing activity and R&D activities i. e. 50 per…

Rolls Royce PLC v. DIT (339 ITR 147) — Cited in 28 Judgments | BharatTax