← All Phrases

“dependent agent PE”

International TaxDTAA Article 5DTAA Article 5172 judgments

The decision most relied on for dependent agent PE is DIT v. Morgan Stanley & Co. (292 ITR 416), cited in 360 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on dependent agent PE

DIT v. Morgan Stanley & Co.
292 ITR 416 · 2007 · Supreme Court
360
citing judgments

A Permanent Establishment (PE) signifies a foreign enterprise's virtual projection into another country, with a fixed place PE existing where an MNE's business is wholly or partly carried on. A dependent agent PE requires the agent to act as such and/or have the authority to conclude contracts for the foreign enterprise under DTAA provisions.

Motorola Inc. v. Dy. CIT
95 ITD 269 · 2005 · High Court
213
citing judgments

Revenue must demonstrate the existence of a Permanent Establishment (PE) of a foreign enterprise in India, including establishing that transactions underlying a Dependent Agent PE were not at arm's length. Income from the sale of goods is not taxable in India if title and risk in the goods pass outside India.

National Petroleum Construction Company v. DIT
383 ITR 648 · 2016 · High Court
69
citing judgments

An Indian agent providing marketing services, without the authority to conclude contracts on behalf of a foreign company, does not constitute a Dependent Agent Permanent Establishment (DAPE) for the foreign company in India under DTAA provisions.

DIT v. E-Funds IT Solution
364 ITR 256 · 2014 · High Court
61
citing judgments

A subsidiary is an independent legal entity, and the mere relationship of holding-subsidiary or control by itself does not result in a Permanent Establishment (PE) for the foreign company in India, whether it be a fixed place PE or a dependent agent PE, even when the subsidiary provides outsourced services.

Delmas France v. Asstt. DIT (IT)
17 Taxmann.com 91 · 2012 · ITAT
49
citing judgments

The ITAT evaluates the profit neutrality theory for a Dependent Agent Permanent Establishment (DAPE), stating that unlike a service PE, a DAPE assumes entrepreneurship risk which must be considered for arm's length remuneration.

DIT v. Galileo International Inc.
224 CTR 251 · High Court
37
citing judgments

If the income attributable to a Permanent Establishment (PE) in India is less than the remuneration paid to a dependent agent, the assessment is extinguished and no further computation of income is required.

Galileo International Inc. v. DCIT
19 SOT 257 · 2008 · ITAT
31
citing judgments

A Computer Reservation System (CRS) installed at the premises of Indian subscribers can constitute a Permanent Establishment (PE) in India, and a portion of income from Indian operations may be taxable in India, potentially exhausted by commission paid to Indian distributors.

Western Union Financial Services Inc. v. ADIT
104 ITD 34 · 2007 · ITAT
26
citing judgments

Software installed in India granting access to an assessee's mainframe located outside India does not constitute a Permanent Establishment (PE) in India. Agents are not considered to have an agency PE if they are not economically dependent on the assessee and lack the authority to conclude contracts.

Judgments citing dependent agent PE

M/S.Redington Distributions Pte Ltd., Singapore vs. ACIT, Intltaxation Circle-2(1), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 894/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr. Percy PardiwalaFor Respondent: Mr. Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 144CSection 148Section 271(1)(c)

after making necessary enquiries concluded that, the assessee had both a fixed place PE and a dependent agent PE in India. The AO thereafter attributed the profits to this PE on the basis of the total employee cost of RIL and the assessee, and also the asset base ... Distribution Pte Ltd. :: 12 :: ancilliary support services received from the employees of RIL in India did not result in any fixed place or dependent agent PE in India. The Ld. Counsel took us through the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of E-Funds IT Solution

M/S.Redington Distributions Pte Ltd., Singapore vs. ACIT, Intltaxation Circle-2(1), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 893/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr. Percy PardiwalaFor Respondent: Mr. Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 144CSection 148Section 271(1)(c)

after making necessary enquiries concluded that, the assessee had both a fixed place PE and a dependent agent PE in India. The AO thereafter attributed the profits to this PE on the basis of the total employee cost of RIL and the assessee, and also the asset base ... Distribution Pte Ltd. :: 12 :: ancilliary support services received from the employees of RIL in India did not result in any fixed place or dependent agent PE in India. The Ld. Counsel took us through the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of E-Funds IT Solution

M/S. Redington Distribution Pte Ltd., Singapore vs. ACIT, Intl Taxation Circle-2(1), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 892/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr. Percy PardiwalaFor Respondent: Mr. Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 144CSection 148Section 271(1)(c)

after making necessary enquiries concluded that, the assessee had both a fixed place PE and a dependent agent PE in India. The AO thereafter attributed the profits to this PE on the basis of the total employee cost of RIL and the assessee, and also the asset base ... Distribution Pte Ltd. :: 12 :: ancilliary support services received from the employees of RIL in India did not result in any fixed place or dependent agent PE in India. The Ld. Counsel took us through the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of E-Funds IT Solution

M/S. Redington Distribution Pte Ltd., Singapore vs. ACIT, Intl Taxation Circle-2(1), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 891/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr. Percy PardiwalaFor Respondent: Mr. Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 144CSection 148Section 271(1)(c)

after making necessary enquiries concluded that, the assessee had both a fixed place PE and a dependent agent PE in India. The AO thereafter attributed the profits to this PE on the basis of the total employee cost of RIL and the assessee, and also the asset base ... Distribution Pte Ltd. :: 12 :: ancilliary support services received from the employees of RIL in India did not result in any fixed place or dependent agent PE in India. The Ld. Counsel took us through the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of E-Funds IT Solution

M/S.Redington Distributors Pte Ltd., Singapore vs. ACIT, Intl Taxation Circle-2(1), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 890/CHNY/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr. Percy PardiwalaFor Respondent: Mr. Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 144CSection 148Section 271(1)(c)

after making necessary enquiries concluded that, the assessee had both a fixed place PE and a dependent agent PE in India. The AO thereafter attributed the profits to this PE on the basis of the total employee cost of RIL and the assessee, and also the asset base ... Distribution Pte Ltd. :: 12 :: ancilliary support services received from the employees of RIL in India did not result in any fixed place or dependent agent PE in India. The Ld. Counsel took us through the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of E-Funds IT Solution

M/S.Redington Distribution Pte Ltd., Singapore vs. ACIT, Intl Taxation Circle-2(1), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 889/CHNY/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr. Percy PardiwalaFor Respondent: Mr. Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 144CSection 148Section 271(1)(c)

after making necessary enquiries concluded that, the assessee had both a fixed place PE and a dependent agent PE in India. The AO thereafter attributed the profits to this PE on the basis of the total employee cost of RIL and the assessee, and also the asset base ... Distribution Pte Ltd. :: 12 :: ancilliary support services received from the employees of RIL in India did not result in any fixed place or dependent agent PE in India. The Ld. Counsel took us through the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of E-Funds IT Solution

Rga International Reinsurance Company Designated Activity Company, Ireland vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Tax) - Circle 4(1)(1), Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1092/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Satya Pal Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 153Section 9(1)(i)

attributed to the dependent agent over and above the arms' length remuneration. The relevant extracts are reproduced as under: "Where a dependent agent PE is found to exist under Article 5(5), the question arises as to how to attribute profits to the PE. The answer is to follow ... have been given on the basis of the 'single taxpayer approach', holding that once an arm's length payment is made to a dependent agent PE, no further profits can be taxed in the hands of foreign enterprise. By relying on the decision of the DIT (International Taxation) v Morgan

Zscaler, Inc., United States of America vs. DCIT, International Tax, Circle 3(1)(1), New Delhi

The appeals are allowed

ITA 928/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal, Ccountant Member Assessment Year: 2021-22 Assessment Year : 2022-23 Zscaler Inc., Vs Dcit, 120, Holger Way San Jose, International Tax Circle 3(1)(1), California, Usa, Delhi. Usa 95134. Pan: Aaacz4350P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate; Shri Kishore Kunal, Advocate; Ms Ankita Prakash, Advocate; & Shri Govind Gupta, Advocate Revenue By : Ms Ekta Jain, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 05.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.06.2025 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Appeals Are Preferred By The Assessee Against The Final Assessment Orders Dated 31.10.2023 & 22.01.2025 Passed By The Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, International Tax Circle 3(1)(1), Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao) U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Ekta Jain, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

Equalisation levy. In the instant case, PE has been established in assessee's case by treating ZSCALER Softech India Pvt. Ltd as dependent agent PE discussed in detail above. Hence, the assessee does not fall under section 165А. As clearly discussed above, the assessee's receipts falls under business income

Zscaler, Inc., United States vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Tax, Circle 3(1)(1), Delhi

The appeals are allowed

ITA 3376/DEL/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal, Ccountant Member Assessment Year: 2021-22 Assessment Year : 2022-23 Zscaler Inc., Vs Dcit, 120, Holger Way San Jose, International Tax Circle 3(1)(1), California, Usa, Delhi. Usa 95134. Pan: Aaacz4350P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate; Shri Kishore Kunal, Advocate; Ms Ankita Prakash, Advocate; & Shri Govind Gupta, Advocate Revenue By : Ms Ekta Jain, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 05.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.06.2025 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Appeals Are Preferred By The Assessee Against The Final Assessment Orders Dated 31.10.2023 & 22.01.2025 Passed By The Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, International Tax Circle 3(1)(1), Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao) U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Ekta Jain, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

Equalisation levy. In the instant case, PE has been established in assessee's case by treating ZSCALER Softech India Pvt. Ltd as dependent agent PE discussed in detail above. Hence, the assessee does not fall under section 165А. As clearly discussed above, the assessee's receipts falls under business income

International Air Transport Association, Mumbai (for Sending Notices) vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation) - Circle 2(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 3330/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3330/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2020-21) International Air V/S. Dcit (It), Circle 2(2)(1), Transport Association बिधम Mumbai C/O Ernst & Young Llp Room No. 1722, 17Th Floor, 14Th Floor, The Ruby, 29, Air India Building, Senapati Bapat Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai, Dadar (West), Mumbai, Maharashtra-400021 Maharashtra-400028 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aacci4695N Appellant/अपीलधर्थी .. Respondent/प्रनिवधदी

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka and Shri DiveshFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar

provisions of the India-Canada tax treaty. c. Without prejudice to the above, even assuming (without admitting) that the Appellant has a dependent agent PE in India, erred in: i. attributing 40% of the gross receipts of the Appellant from the ATCs, on account of provision of distance learning courses ... income attributable to the alleged dependent agent PE in India, and ii. estimating the profits at 100% of the gross receipts attributed to the dependent agent PE of the Appellant on account of provision of distance learning courses. Ground No. 3-Supply of physical publications a. Erred in taxing

Hempel Singapore Pte Ltd, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax International Taxation Circle 2(2)(2), Mumbai

Appeal are allowed

ITA 946/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Apr 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar- Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 147Section 153Section 9

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & MS PADMAVATHY S, AM I.T.A. No.946/Mum/2025

Shri Vijay Singh, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Gurgaon

The appeals are allowed

ITA 928/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal, Ccountant Member Assessment Year: 2021-22 Assessment Year : 2022-23 Zscaler Inc., Vs Dcit, 120, Holger Way San Jose, International Tax Circle 3(1)(1), California, Usa, Delhi. Usa 95134. Pan: Aaacz4350P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate; Shri Kishore Kunal, Advocate; Ms Ankita Prakash, Advocate; & Shri Govind Gupta, Advocate Revenue By : Ms Ekta Jain, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 05.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.06.2025 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Appeals Are Preferred By The Assessee Against The Final Assessment Orders Dated 31.10.2023 & 22.01.2025 Passed By The Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, International Tax Circle 3(1)(1), Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao) U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Ekta Jain, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

Equalisation levy. In the instant case, PE has been established in assessee's case by treating ZSCALER Softech India Pvt. Ltd as dependent agent PE discussed in detail above. Hence, the assessee does not fall under section 165А. As clearly discussed above, the assessee's receipts falls under business income

Esm Group Inc, Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 1(2)(2), International Taxation, Delhi

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

ITA 9365/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Feb 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra[A.Y 2008-09] M/S Esm Group Inc. Vs. The Dy.C.I.T Suite 118 N, 300, Corporate Park Circle -1(2)(2) Way Amherst, New York International Taxation New Delhi Pan: Aacce 4072 H (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By :Shri Sudhir Kumar Dash, Ca Department By :Ms. C. Chandra Kanta, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.02.2025

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Kumar Dash, CAFor Respondent: Ms. C. Chandra Kanta, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(3)Section 148Section 234ASection 234BSection 9(1)(vii)

ITA No.9365/Del/2019 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘D’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax- 16(1), Mumbai vs. Culver Max Entertainment Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6815/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), MS PADMAVATHY S (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 391Section 9(1)Section 9(1)(i)

without considering the fact that the arm's length price had not been determined or accepted for the functions undertaken by the dependent agent PE of the assessee in India for furthering of the economic interests and presence of the assessee in India?" 6. Whether on the facts

Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax 16(1), Mumbai vs. Culver Max Entertainmet Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6814/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), MS PADMAVATHY S (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 391Section 9(1)Section 9(1)(i)

without considering the fact that the arm's length price had not been determined or accepted for the functions undertaken by the dependent agent PE of the assessee in India for furthering of the economic interests and presence of the assessee in India?" 6. Whether on the facts

International Air Transport Association (Canada), Mumbai vs. ACIT (It), Range 2 (2)(1), Mumbai

Accordingly Ground No. 3 to 7 are allowed

ITA 7117/MUM/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka, Shri DiveshFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 234A

treated to be an independent agent. The implication of the agent being treated as an independent agent is that the provisions of dependent agent PE, as set out in Article 5(5), can never come into play in the cases in which the business is carried out by the foreign ... deal with the contentions advanced by the ld. A.R that the ATC‟s do not satisfy the conditions laid down for dependant agent PE under Article 5(4) of the tax treaty, which aspect is thus left open. 13. In the backdrop of our aforesaid observations, we herein conclude that

International Air Association (Canada), Mumbai vs. Asst CIT (International Taxation) Range 2 (2)(1), Mumbai

Accordingly Ground No. 3 to 7 are allowed

ITA 7072/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka, Shri DiveshFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 234A

treated to be an independent agent. The implication of the agent being treated as an independent agent is that the provisions of dependent agent PE, as set out in Article 5(5), can never come into play in the cases in which the business is carried out by the foreign ... deal with the contentions advanced by the ld. A.R that the ATC‟s do not satisfy the conditions laid down for dependant agent PE under Article 5(4) of the tax treaty, which aspect is thus left open. 13. In the backdrop of our aforesaid observations, we herein conclude that

Internatinal Air Transport Association (Canada), Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 2(2)(1), Mumbai

Accordingly Ground No. 3 to 7 are allowed

ITA 7416/MUM/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka, Shri DiveshFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 234A

treated to be an independent agent. The implication of the agent being treated as an independent agent is that the provisions of dependent agent PE, as set out in Article 5(5), can never come into play in the cases in which the business is carried out by the foreign ... deal with the contentions advanced by the ld. A.R that the ATC‟s do not satisfy the conditions laid down for dependant agent PE under Article 5(4) of the tax treaty, which aspect is thus left open. 13. In the backdrop of our aforesaid observations, we herein conclude that

M/S. Qliktech International Ab, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Assessment Circle-2(1), Bengaluru

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

ITA 990/BANG/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Dec 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A Sreenivasa Rao, CIT (DR)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL

Ge Hydro France, Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle Int.Tax. 1(3)(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1881/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Nov 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2020-21] Ge Hydro France, Deputy Commissioner Of Income A-18, 1St Floor, Okhla Tax, Industrial, Phase-Ii, Vs Circle International Tax-1(3)(1), Tehkhand, South East Delhi, Civic Centre, Okhla Industrial Estate S.O. New Delhi-110002 New Delhi-110020 Pan-Aafca1688N Assessee Revenue Assessee By Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. & Shri Aditya Vohra, Adv. & Shri Arpit Goyal, Ca Revenue By Shri Vijay B. Vasanta, Cit-Dr & Ms.Sabiha Rizvi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 09.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 06.11.2024

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 44B

before it has been held that the assessee has a PE in the form of a fixed place and dependent agent PE (DAPE) at and through GE Power India Ltd. (GEPIL) and therefore the existence of the assessee’s permanent establishment is an uncontested fact. 2.3 In view of these ... PE in India and tax payment in India and that the assessee has a PE in the form of a fixed place and dependent agent PE (DAPE) at and through GE Power India Ltd. (GEPIL). . The DRP after considering the submissions of the assessee as well as the draft assessment