Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
YASHWANT VARMA, PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, JJ
PROGRESS RAIL LOCOMOTIVE INC. – Appellant
Versus
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE - NOIDA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. introduction of the petitioner and the context of legal proceedings. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. summary of factual background and actions taken by the tax authorities. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. submissions and arguments presented by progress rail locomotive inc. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 4. court's analysis of cbdt notification and its implications on jurisdiction. (Para 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 5. court’s conclusions regarding the existence of a permanent establishment. (Para 81 , 82 , 83 , 84 , 85) |
| 6. final decisions regarding the writ petitions and resolutions. (Para 139 , 140) |
JUDGMENT
YASHWANT VARMA, J.
| S. No. | Particulars | Paragraph Nos. |
| A. | INTRODUCTION | 1-6 |
| B. | FACTUAL NARRATIVE | 7-12 |
| C. | SUBMISSIONS OF PROGRESS RAIL LOCOMOTIVE INC. | 13-16 |
| D. | CBDT NOTIFICATION DATED 03 NOVEMBER 2014 | 17-21 |
| E. | THE PE ISSUE- A BRIEF BACKGROUND | 22-30 |
| F. | THE CHALLENGE OF PROGRESS RAIL LOCOMOTIVE INC. CONTD. | 31-56 |
| G. | TAX AUTHORITY‘S RESPONSE | 57-65 |
| H. | PE- A BROAD OVERVIEW | 66-72 |
| I. | RESPONDENTS‘ TAKE ON PE- A RECAP | 73-77 |
| J. | ANALYSING ARTICLE 5 OF THE INDIA-USA DTAA | 78-80 |
| K. | THE COURT‘S ANALYSIS | 81-113 |
| K.1 | THE SERVICE PE | 82-84 |
| K.2. | THE FIXED PLACE PE | 85-95 |
| K.3. | ARTICLE 5(3)- PREPARATORY AND AUXILIARY FUNCTIONS | 96-110 |
| K.4. | ARTICLE 5(4) AND D | |
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
