9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 1594X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arsen & Toubro Limited and the appellant on the other hand as consortium partners executed on 28th February, 2006. It was indicated that under the contract, appellant received certain amount of money. It was held out that a part thereof was received in relation to inside India activities and, in respect thereof, it has incurred certain expenses and after deducting such expenses, it has earned a loss and, accordingly, earned no income taxable in India. The Assessing Officer, by its order dated 25th October, 2010 refused to accept some of the deductions as was claimed by the appellant and found on the disclosure made by the appellant that in addition to the sum of money shown to have been received, appellant has received other sums of monies ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , it has been provided that profits of an enterprise of a Contracting State shall be taxable only in that State unless the enterprise carries on business in the other Contracting State through a permanent establishment situated therein. It, therefore, recognizes two tax identities of an enterprise. The said paragraph makes it clear that the profits of the enterprise may be taxed in the other State only so much of the same which is attributable to that permanent establishment. 5. Paragraph 2 of Article 7 is as follows :- "Subject to the provisions of paragraph (3), where an enterprise of a Contracting State carries on business in the other Contracting State through a permanent establishment situated therein, there shall in each Contractin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arned and said to have been on account of out of India activity was earned, in fact, on account of within India activity. 9. Being a resident of Korea, appellant is governed by the Income-tax Laws applicable to the class of assessees as that of the appellant as prevalent in Korea. Therefore, it has a tax identity in Korea. In addition thereto, appellant has submitted to the jurisdiction of Indian Taxing Authorities by furnishing return of income and, thereby, acknowledged that it has also a tax identity in India. The question is, this identity is covered by which provision of the Agreement. In terms of paragraph 1 of Article 7, appellant will acquire its tax identity in India only when it carries on business in India through a permanent es ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erms whereof "permanent establishment" means a fixed place of business through which business of an enterprise is wholly or partly carried on. In the instant case, according to the revenue, the Project Office of the appellant in Mumbai is the "permanent establishment" of the appellant in India through which it carried on business during the relevant assessment year and 25 per cent of the gross receipt is attributable to the said business. Neither the Assessing Officer, nor the Tribunal has made any effort to bring on record any evidence to justify the same. 10. That being the situation, we allow the appeal, set aside the judgment and order under appeal as well as the assessment order in so far as the same relates to imposition of tax liabi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
