9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 1200X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... covered by the decision of ITAT in assessee’s own case for assessment year 2003-04 and 2004-05 [2014 (11) TMI 102 - ITAT DELHI] as stated that the ITAT has not accepted the assessee’s contention that there is no PE in India. The ITAT has given the direction how the profit is to be attributed to the PE in India. He, therefore, submitted that for the year under consideration also, the income may be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onable opportunity to the appellant by not keeping the proceeding in abeyance, as sought for, even without any dismissal of the request. 2. That in the absence of any PE in India in terms of DTAA (Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement), no profits alleged to have accrued to the appellant are there and consequently the levy of tax as made by the AO is arbitrary, unjust and bad in law. 3. That the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e amount reimbursed by US Nonresident to its Branch (Appellant), acting as a pure a cost centre the assessment at a figure of ₹ 33,63,300/- is bad in law. CEC is a firm and not a company even in US. It is 100% owned by single individual hence does not fall in the category of a Company. 5. That there is no international transaction with an Associated Enterprise (AE) as contemplated under Se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l rate @5.33% as per US tax return for calendar year 2005 as done by AO in earlier years. (iv) That the AO and the CIT(Appeals) both, after working out the profit attributable, if any to the Branch in India ought to have further allowed margin for functions performed, assets employed, working capital available and risks assumed and consequently the adoption of a markup rate of 10% is very high. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... objection to the above submission of the assessee and he stated that the matter may be sent back to the file of the Assessing Officer for computing the income as per the direction of the ITAT for assessment year 2003-04 & 2004-05. 5. In view of the above submission of both the parties, we set aside the orders of authorities below in respect of the issues raised before us and direct the Assessing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
