“agency PE”

Gemological Research (Thailand) Co. Ltd., Thailand vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax (International Taxation) Circle-2(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee allowed

Bench: Ms Kavitha Rajagopal & Smt. Renu Jauhrigemological Research V/S. Acit(International (Thailand) Co. Ltd. बनाम Taxation) 2(3)(2), Mumbai 933, Mitrotown Ofce 17Th Floor, Air India Tower, 19Th Floor, Unit Building, Nariman Point, 1903-1910, Rama Iv Road, Mumbai-400021 Wang Mai Pathum, Bangkok, Thailand-10330 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aadcg7850L Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

21/06/2019after examining the facts of the case and Article -5 of India USDTAA held, that GLA-US is not having any PE or agency PE in India. The ld. Counsel for the assessee asserted that the facts and the nature of transaction in the present case are identical. The Assessing ... PE is not triggered in the case of the assessee company. 13. In terms of Article 5(4) of the India-US/DTAA, an agency PE is created where a person-other than an agent of an independent status to whom paragraph 5 applies - is acting in India on behalf

Gemological Institute of America Inc., California vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax (International Taxation) Circle-2(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms Kavitha Rajagopal & Smt. Renu Jauhrigemological Institute Of V/S. Acit (International बनाम America Inc. Taxation)-2(3)(2), Mumbai 5345, The Robert Mouawad 17Th Floor, Air India Campus, Armada Drive, Building, Nariman Point, Carlsbad, California Mumbai-400021 Zip-092008 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aadcg7962K Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

Page 8 of 22 A.Y. 2018-19 Gemological Institute of America Inc. 13. In terms of Article 5(4) of the India - US/DTAA, an agency PE is created where a person-other than an agent of an independent status to whom paragraph 5 applies is acting in India on behalf ... assessee company nor has it secured any orders for the assessee company in India. Thus, GIA India Lab cannot be regarded as 'agency PE' of the assessee company in India. 16. Before parting, we may also note the reference made by the Ld. Representative to the assessment concluded

Sky Gem, Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC-1(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee allowed

Bench: Ms Kavitha Rajagopal & Smt. Renu Jauhrigemological Research V/S. Acit(International (Thailand) Co. Ltd. बनाम Taxation) 2(3)(2), Mumbai 933, Mitrotown Ofce 17Th Floor, Air India Tower, 19Th Floor, Unit Building, Nariman Point, 1903-1910, Rama Iv Road, Mumbai-400021 Wang Mai Pathum, Bangkok, Thailand-10330 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aadcg7850L Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

21/06/2019after examining the facts of the case and Article -5 of India USDTAA held, that GLA-US is not having any PE or agency PE in India. The ld. Counsel for the assessee asserted that the facts and the nature of transaction in the present case are identical. The Assessing ... PE is not triggered in the case of the assessee company. 13. In terms of Article 5(4) of the India-US/DTAA, an agency PE is created where a person-other than an agent of an independent status to whom paragraph 5 applies - is acting in India on behalf

Sky Gem, Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC-1(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms Kavitha Rajagopal & Smt. Renu Jauhrigemological Institute Of V/S. Acit (International बनाम America Inc. Taxation)-2(3)(2), Mumbai 5345, The Robert Mouawad 17Th Floor, Air India Campus, Armada Drive, Building, Nariman Point, Carlsbad, California Mumbai-400021 Zip-092008 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aadcg7962K Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

Page 8 of 22 A.Y. 2018-19 Gemological Institute of America Inc. 13. In terms of Article 5(4) of the India - US/DTAA, an agency PE is created where a person-other than an agent of an independent status to whom paragraph 5 applies is acting in India on behalf ... assessee company nor has it secured any orders for the assessee company in India. Thus, GIA India Lab cannot be regarded as 'agency PE' of the assessee company in India. 16. Before parting, we may also note the reference made by the Ld. Representative to the assessment concluded

Micro Focus Software Inc., Usa vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle 3(2)(2), International Taxation, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal & Smt. Renu Jauhrimicro Focus Software Inc. V/S. Dcit,(International Tax) बनाम (Formerly Known As Novell Circle 3(2)(2), Inc.) 16Th Floor, Air India Laurel, Block D, 65/2, Building, Nariman Point, Bagmane Tech Park, C. V. Mumbai-400021 Raman Nagar, Byrasandra, Bangalore, Karnataka, India- 560093 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aabcn5034F Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

with computation of profits of installation PE, in our considered view, do not have any bearing on the computation of profits of the dependent agency PE. We are, therefore, not persuaded by this reasoning either. 12. Late Prof Klaus Vogel, one of the very eminent international tax scholars ... paid to the PE must take into account 'all the risks of the foreign enterprise as assumed by the PE', but then in an agency PE situation, unlike a service PE situation which was the case before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, a DAPE assumes the entrepreneurship risk in respect

Gemological Institute of America, Inc., United States of America vs. ACIT (Int Tax Circle) - 2(3)(2), Mumbai

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

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal & Smt. Renu Jauhrigemological Institute Of V/S. Acit (International बनाम America, Inc. Taxation) Circle 5345, The Rober Mouawad 2(3)(2)Mumbai Camplus, Armada Drive, 17Th Floor, Air India Carlsbad, California Zip – Building, Nariman Point, 092008 Mumbai-400021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aadcg7962K Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

service PE is not triggered in the case of the assessee company. 13. In terms of Article 5(4) of the India - US/DTAA, an agency PE is created where a person-other than an agent of an independent status to whom paragraph 5 applies is acting in India on behalf ... assessee company nor has it secured any orders for the assessee company in India. Thus, GIA India Lab cannot be regarded as 'agency PE' of the assessee company in India. 16. Before parting, we may also note the reference made by the Ld. Representative to the assessment concluded

Hapag-Llyod Aktiengesellschaft, Mumbai vs. DCIT-International Taxation-2(2)(2), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Assessing Officer / DRP failed to appreciate that even ff ft held that HLIPL constitutes an agency PE of the appellant in India, no profits could be attributed to the agency PE in India since the appellant has remunerated HLIPL

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax International Taxation-4(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Star Cruise Management Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2018-

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

case and in law, the ld CITA) erred in holding that Star Travel (India) Services Put Ltd (“SCITSPL) does not constitute an agency PE of the assessee within the meaning of Explanation 2 to section 9(1)(i) of the Act with regard to the business income received ... Travel Services Put Lid ("SCITSPL‟) is at an arm‟s length price, nothing further cut of the revenue is attributable to the assessee‟s Agency PE in India for offering to taxation in India, without considering the fact that no such analysis of functions and risks undertaken by the PE

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax International Taxation-4(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Star Cruise Management Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2018-

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

case and in law, the ld CITA) erred in holding that Star Travel (India) Services Put Ltd (“SCITSPL) does not constitute an agency PE of the assessee within the meaning of Explanation 2 to section 9(1)(i) of the Act with regard to the business income received ... Travel Services Put Lid ("SCITSPL‟) is at an arm‟s length price, nothing further cut of the revenue is attributable to the assessee‟s Agency PE in India for offering to taxation in India, without considering the fact that no such analysis of functions and risks undertaken by the PE

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax International Taxation-4(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Star Cruise Management Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2018-

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

case and in law, the ld CITA) erred in holding that Star Travel (India) Services Put Ltd (“SCITSPL) does not constitute an agency PE of the assessee within the meaning of Explanation 2 to section 9(1)(i) of the Act with regard to the business income received ... Travel Services Put Lid ("SCITSPL‟) is at an arm‟s length price, nothing further cut of the revenue is attributable to the assessee‟s Agency PE in India for offering to taxation in India, without considering the fact that no such analysis of functions and risks undertaken by the PE

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

discussions, we hold that the assessee did not have a fixed place permanent establishment in India, that the question of assessee having a dependent agency PE is wholly academic in the sense that, as the law stands now, the existence of the DAPE is wholly tax neutral in India. Accordingly