a i t-2011-- i t a t- a l l i n d i a n t a x e s（我t - 2011 t t - l l我n d n t x e s）（12页）.docVIP

下载本文档

5
0
约3.69万字
约 12页
2017-01-23 发布于四川
举报
版权申诉

a i t-2011-- i t a t- a l l i n d i a n t a x e s（我t - 2011 t t - l l我n d n t x e s）（12页）.doc

1、原创力文档（book118）网站文档一经付费（服务费），不意味着购买了该文档的版权，仅供个人/单位学习、研究之用，不得用于商业用途，未经授权，严禁复制、发行、汇编、翻译或者网络传播等，侵权必究。。
2、本站所有内容均由合作方或网友上传，本站不对文档的完整性、权威性及其观点立场正确性做任何保证或承诺！文档内容仅供研究参考，付费前请自行鉴别。如您付费，意味着您自己接受本站规则且自行承担风险，本站不退款、不进行额外附加服务；查看《如何避免下载的几个坑》。如果您已付费下载过本站文档，您可以点击这里二次下载。
3、如文档侵犯商业秘密、侵犯著作权、侵犯人身权等，请点击“版权申诉”（推荐），也可以打举报电话：400-050-0827(电话支持时间：9:00-18:30)。
4、该文档为VIP文档，如果想要下载，成为VIP会员后，下载免费。
5、成为VIP后，下载本文档将扣除1次下载权益。下载后，不支持退款、换文档。如有疑问请联系我们。
6、成为VIP后，您将拥有八大权益，权益包括：VIP文档下载权益、阅读免打扰、文档格式转换、高级专利检索、专属身份标志、高级客服、多端互通、版权登记。
7、VIP文档为合作方或网友上传，每下载1次，网站将根据用户上传文档的质量评分、类型等，对文档贡献者给予高额补贴、流量扶持。如果你也想贡献VIP文档。上传文档

a i t-2011-- i t a t- a l l i n d i a n t a x e s（我t - 2011 t t - l l我n d n t x e s）（12页）

AIT-2011-409-ITAT IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNALDELHI BENCH “C” DELHI BEFORE SHRI C.L. SETHI AND SHRI K.G. BANSAL ITA No. 5686(Del)/2010Assessment year: 2007-08 GIL Mauritius Holdings Ltd.,C/o SR Batliboi Co., Golf View Corporate Tower-B, Near DLF Golf Course, Sector-42, Gurgaon. Vs. Assistant Director of Income-tax (International Taxation), Dehradun. Appellant by : S/Shri Percy Pardiwalla, Prashant Shah, Manoneet Dalal, ARsRespondent by: Shri Ashwani Kumar Mahajan, CIT, DR Date of Hearing : 29.08.2011Date of pronouncement: 16.09.2011. AIT Head Note: the ship remained in territorial waters of India for such length of time in which the work of assembling the pipe lines could be completed. the words “fixed place” do not represent a point in space but an area in space, which is available to the assessee for assembling the pipe lines. Nonetheless, the work done by the assessee is of assembling the pipe lines and the issue is regarding harmonious interpretation of paragraph nos. (1) and (2). In this situation, we tend to agree with the ld. AAR that if we stop at paragraph no. (1), paragraph 2(i) of the DTAA becomes otiose. This would not be a proper way of construction of the DTAA. The contracting parties included within the definition of the PE only those assembly projects which lasted for more than 9 months. This has been specifically provided in the treaty. This leads to an inference that if an assembly project lasts for less than nine months or nine months, there would be no inference of PE.(Para 10) O R D E R PER K.G. BANSAL : AM The assessee has taken up six grounds in this appeal. In the course of hearing before us, the ld. counsel for the assessee explained that three questions need to be decided for disposal of the appeal. These questions are – (i) whether, the assessee has a Permanent Establishment (‘PE’ for short) in India; (ii) if yes, whether the income ought to be computed under the provision contained in section 44BB