← All Phrases

“fixed place PE”

International TaxDTAA Article 5DTAA Article 5222 judgments

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

India. 2. That the Ld. AO and the Ld. DRP have erred in holding that the Appellant constitutes a PE - Fixed Place PE and Dependent Agent PE, without any basis, material and on frivolous grounds and irrelevant considerations. 3.1 That the Ld. AO and the Ld. DRP have erred ... Rs.396,09,81,782/- is chargeable to tax in India. Ld. AO and DRP erred in holding that the assessee constitutes a PE fixed place PE and dependant agent PE without any basis. 8. The Appellant, a Netherlands-based company eligible for benefits under the India-Netherlands DTAA (*the DTAA

FCS COMPUTER SYSTEMS S PTE LTD,INDIA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE INT TAX 1(3)(1), INDIA

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1034/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarfcs Computer Systems S Pte Ltd, Vs. Acit, Office No. 07, 5Th Floor, A-40, I- International Taxation- Thum Tower-C, Sector-62, Up 1(3)(1), Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaacf7319J Assessee By : Shri Ashwani Taneja, Adv Shri Divyansh Dubery, Adv Shri Shivam Kukreja, Adv Ms. Ria Toyal, Adv Revenue By: Ms. Ekta Jain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 04/12/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 09/01/2026

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Taneja, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Ekta Jain, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C

cross border entity." 24. In view of the foregoing analysis, we affirm the findings of the High Court that the appellant has a fixed place PE in India within the meaning of Article 5(1) of the DTAA, and that, the income received under the SOSA is attributable to such

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)

India. 2.2 The AO in the DAO held that the assessee did not conduct any offshore sales, had a Supervisory PE, DAPE and Fixed Place PE on supply of goods in ITA No.- 1191/Del/2025 SAIC Motor Corpora"on Ltd. India and proposed to add the income attributable to the PE ... against the action of the Assessing Officer in determining Permanent Establishment (PE) of the Assessee in India by way of supervisory PE and Fixed Place PE. All the above grounds are therefore, dealt together. These grounds are reproduced as under: “ Re: Constitution of Permanent Establishment ('PE') of the appellant

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)

assessee in India. 2.1 That on facts and in law the CIT(A) erred in upholding that OIPL constituted a: (a) Fixed Place PE (under Article 5(1) of the DTAA) allegedly through which the business of the assessee is partly carried out. (b) Service PE (under Article ... DTAA Page 6 of 36 ITA Nos. 1833 to 1836/DEL/2009 & 3313/DEL/2013 Oracle Systems Corpn. Vs. ADDCIT viz. Article 5(1) for Fixed Place PE; Article 5(2)(l) for Employee based PE; and Article 5(4) for Agency PE. Accordingly, the AO has considered

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)

assessee in India. 2.1 That on facts and in law the CIT(A) erred in upholding that OIPL constituted a: (a) Fixed Place PE (under Article 5(1) of the DTAA) allegedly through which the business of the assessee is partly carried out. (b) Service PE (under Article ... DTAA Page 6 of 36 ITA Nos. 1833 to 1836/DEL/2009 & 3313/DEL/2013 Oracle Systems Corpn. Vs. ADDCIT viz. Article 5(1) for Fixed Place PE; Article 5(2)(l) for Employee based PE; and Article 5(4) for Agency PE. Accordingly, the AO has considered

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)

assessee in India. 2.1 That on facts and in law the CIT(A) erred in upholding that OIPL constituted a: (a) Fixed Place PE (under Article 5(1) of the DTAA) allegedly through which the business of the assessee is partly carried out. (b) Service PE (under Article ... DTAA Page 6 of 36 ITA Nos. 1833 to 1836/DEL/2009 & 3313/DEL/2013 Oracle Systems Corpn. Vs. ADDCIT viz. Article 5(1) for Fixed Place PE; Article 5(2)(l) for Employee based PE; and Article 5(4) for Agency PE. Accordingly, the AO has considered

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)

assessee in India. 2.1 That on facts and in law the CIT(A) erred in upholding that OIPL constituted a: (a) Fixed Place PE (under Article 5(1) of the DTAA) allegedly through which the business of the assessee is partly carried out. (b) Service PE (under Article ... DTAA Page 6 of 36 ITA Nos. 1833 to 1836/DEL/2009 & 3313/DEL/2013 Oracle Systems Corpn. Vs. ADDCIT viz. Article 5(1) for Fixed Place PE; Article 5(2)(l) for Employee based PE; and Article 5(4) for Agency PE. Accordingly, the AO has considered

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)

assessee in India. 2.1 That on facts and in law the CIT(A) erred in upholding that OIPL constituted a: (a) Fixed Place PE (under Article 5(1) of the DTAA) allegedly through which the business of the assessee is partly carried out. (b) Service PE (under Article ... DTAA Page 6 of 36 ITA Nos. 1833 to 1836/DEL/2009 & 3313/DEL/2013 Oracle Systems Corpn. Vs. ADDCIT viz. Article 5(1) for Fixed Place PE; Article 5(2)(l) for Employee based PE; and Article 5(4) for Agency PE. Accordingly, the AO has considered

ASIA TODAY LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADIT (IT) 2(2), MUMBAI

In the result, Assessee's appeal is allowed

ITA 1403/MUM/2008[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Dec 2025AY 2004-2005

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Omkareshwar Chidaraassessment Year: 2004-05 M/S. Asia Today Limited, Asst. Director Of Income C/O. Zee Entertainment Enterprises Tax (International Ltd., Vs. Taxation)-2(2), 135, Dr. Annie Besant Road, Scindia House, Worli, Mumbai – 400 018 Bellard Estate, Pan: Aabca0249F Mumbai - 400039 (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Niraj Sheth, Ld. A.R. Revenue By : Shri Krishna Kumar, Ld. Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 10.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.12.2025 O R D E R Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 25.01.2007, Impugned Herein, Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (In Short Ld. Commissioner) U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) For The A.Y. 2004-05. 2. The Relevant Facts For Adjudication Of This Appeal Are As Under: The Assessee, Being A Foreign Telecasting Company Incorporated In Mauritius & Having Tax Residency Certificate Of Mauritius , During The Ay Under Consideration Was Engaged In The Production & Acquiring Rights Of Various Television Films Including Feature Films, As A Copy Right Owner/Holder Of Various Hindi Feature Films Produced & Censored In India, As Mentioned In Schedule ‘C’ Annexed With The ‘Agreement Of 2 M/S Asia Today Ltd. Vs Asst. Dit (Int. Taxation)-2(2)

For Appellant: Shri Niraj Sheth, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Ld. Sr. D.R
Section 250Section 9(1)(vi)

circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. ITAT is correct in holding that the assessee did not have a fixed place PE in India by observing that there was nothing to suggest that the assessee had any control over the business/premises of ESPN India when it has been

SMS GROUP GMBH,DELHI vs. ACIT.CIRCLE-3(1)(2), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 377/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri M. S. Nethrapal, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

supervision services offered by the assessee, the technicians (employees) of the assessee company visit India. Thus, the presence of technicians in India constitutes fixed place PE in India within meaning of Article 5(1) of India-Germany Treaty. 8. The ld AO observed that taxation of business income

SMS GROUP GMBH,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 3(1)(2), INTERNATIONAL TXATION, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 993/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri M. S. Nethrapal, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

supervision services offered by the assessee, the technicians (employees) of the assessee company visit India. Thus, the presence of technicians in India constitutes fixed place PE in India within meaning of Article 5(1) of India-Germany Treaty. 8. The ld AO observed that taxation of business income

SMS GROUP GMBH,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE - 3(1)(2) INTL. TAXATION, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 3297/DEL/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri M. S. Nethrapal, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

supervision services offered by the assessee, the technicians (employees) of the assessee company visit India. Thus, the presence of technicians in India constitutes fixed place PE in India within meaning of Article 5(1) of India-Germany Treaty. 8. The ld AO observed that taxation of business income

SMS GROUP GMBH,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(2) INT. TAXATION, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 1592/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri M. S. Nethrapal, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

supervision services offered by the assessee, the technicians (employees) of the assessee company visit India. Thus, the presence of technicians in India constitutes fixed place PE in India within meaning of Article 5(1) of India-Germany Treaty. 8. The ld AO observed that taxation of business income

SMS GROUP GMBH,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(2), INT. TAXATION, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 1591/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri M. S. Nethrapal, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

supervision services offered by the assessee, the technicians (employees) of the assessee company visit India. Thus, the presence of technicians in India constitutes fixed place PE in India within meaning of Article 5(1) of India-Germany Treaty. 8. The ld AO observed that taxation of business income

ALSTOM TRANSPORT SA,KARNATAKA vs. DCIT, INT. TAXATION CIRCLE 1(1)(1), DELHI

In the result, impugned assessment order is set aside and appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1715/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआअसं.1711 To 1715/िद"ी/2025(िन.व. 2011-12, 2013-14 To 2015-16 और 2022-23)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra & Ms. Priyan TandonFor Respondent: Shri Nikhil Kumar Govila, CIT(DR)

assessment orders for AY 2010-11, 2018-19 and 2019-20, 2020-21 and 2021-22 to hold that the assessee has fixed place PE in India. The AO heavily placed reliance on the reply of DMRC dated 23.12.2022 in SA No. 311 to 315/Del/2025 (A.Y.s

ALSTOM TRANSPORT SA,KARNATAKA vs. DCIT, INT. TAXATION CIRCLE 1(1)(1), DELHI

In the result, impugned assessment order is set aside and appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1714/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआअसं.1711 To 1715/िद"ी/2025(िन.व. 2011-12, 2013-14 To 2015-16 और 2022-23)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra & Ms. Priyan TandonFor Respondent: Shri Nikhil Kumar Govila, CIT(DR)

assessment orders for AY 2010-11, 2018-19 and 2019-20, 2020-21 and 2021-22 to hold that the assessee has fixed place PE in India. The AO heavily placed reliance on the reply of DMRC dated 23.12.2022 in SA No. 311 to 315/Del/2025 (A.Y.s

ALSTOM TRANSPORT SA,BANGALORE vs. DCIT INTL. TAXATION CIRCLE 1(1)(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, impugned assessment order is set aside and appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1713/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआअसं.1711 To 1715/िद"ी/2025(िन.व. 2011-12, 2013-14 To 2015-16 और 2022-23)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra & Ms. Priyan TandonFor Respondent: Shri Nikhil Kumar Govila, CIT(DR)

assessment orders for AY 2010-11, 2018-19 and 2019-20, 2020-21 and 2021-22 to hold that the assessee has fixed place PE in India. The AO heavily placed reliance on the reply of DMRC dated 23.12.2022 in SA No. 311 to 315/Del/2025 (A.Y.s

ALSTOM TRANSPORT SA,BANGALORE vs. DCIT INTL. TAXATION CIRCLE 1(1)(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, impugned assessment order is set aside and appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1712/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआअसं.1711 To 1715/िद"ी/2025(िन.व. 2011-12, 2013-14 To 2015-16 और 2022-23)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra & Ms. Priyan TandonFor Respondent: Shri Nikhil Kumar Govila, CIT(DR)

assessment orders for AY 2010-11, 2018-19 and 2019-20, 2020-21 and 2021-22 to hold that the assessee has fixed place PE in India. The AO heavily placed reliance on the reply of DMRC dated 23.12.2022 in SA No. 311 to 315/Del/2025 (A.Y.s

ALSTOM TRANSPORT SA,KARNATAKA vs. DCIT INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE 1(1)(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, impugned assessment order is set aside and appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1711/DEL/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआअसं.1711 To 1715/िद"ी/2025(िन.व. 2011-12, 2013-14 To 2015-16 और 2022-23)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra & Ms. Priyan TandonFor Respondent: Shri Nikhil Kumar Govila, CIT(DR)

assessment orders for AY 2010-11, 2018-19 and 2019-20, 2020-21 and 2021-22 to hold that the assessee has fixed place PE in India. The AO heavily placed reliance on the reply of DMRC dated 23.12.2022 in SA No. 311 to 315/Del/2025 (A.Y.s

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

payer is located in India. 5. That without prejudice, the DRP erred on facts and in law in holding that even if Fixed Placed PE of the Assessee is not held to be in India, impugned sales commission received by the Assessee is still taxable in India under Article ... that the rights or property in respect of which royalty has been received by the Assessee were not effectively connected with the alleged Fixed Place PE in India. 6.2 That without prejudice, even if the royalty received by the Assessee is taxable in India in terms of section 44DA

Showing 1–20 of 222 · Page 1 of 12

...