9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 1724X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were upheld by the Hon ble jurisdictional High Court in [ 2017 (2) TMI 1514 - DELHI HIGH COURT] and [ 2019 (7) TMI 1920 - DELHI HIGH COURT] respectively. The issue is no longer res integra and covered by the orders of the Hon ble High Court in assessee s own case for the AYs 2007-08 to 2010- 11. We, therefore, do not find any illegality or irregularity in the finding reached by the learned CIT(A) and consequently, find the grounds of appeal of the revenue as devoid of merits. Appeal of the revenue is accordingly dismissed. Appeal of the revenue is dismissed. - ITA No.5552/Del/2016 - - - Dated:- 18-11-2019 - SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER For the Revenue : Shri G.K. D ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 53,78,302/- on account of onshore service segment. 4. According to the assessee, during the FY 2012-13 they earned revenue from C-series contract, RS-12 project, B-22 project, B series contract and out of the contracts mentioned above, first four contracts were signed and executed in earlier years. However, the assessee earned revenue from WO-16 and SB-14 contract with ONGC for the first time during relevant financial year. All these contracts with ONGC involved fabrication and installation of platforms for extraction of oil in previous financial years relevant to the Asstt. Year under consideration. 5. Assessee preferred appeal before the learned CIT(A) and argued that the learned AO mechanically relied upon certain selective portion ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AE or that the activities of the PO of the assessee was preparatory and auxiliary in nature in terms of Article 5(3)(e) of the DTAA, learned CIT(A) committed an error in proper appreciation of the facts and application of law. According to the learned DR, M/s Arcadia Shipping Ltd. was a Dependent Agent Permanent Establishment under Article 5(4) of the DTAA and on all counts of Article 5(2)(c), 5(2)(e), 5(2)(h) and 5(4) of the DTAA, the assessee should have held to have PE in India and the profits attributable to the assessee s PE at 1.92% of its offshore supply segment and 14.79% of its onshore service segment was taxable in India. 8. At the outset, learned AR brought it to our notice that as is evidenced by the assessment order, ld. AO ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
