Alleged Permanent Establishment in India of the Appellant under Article 5(1) and 5(2)(T) of the India - UAE Tax Treaty

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
DELHI BENCH: ‘D’ NEW DELHI
BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND
SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
[Through Video Conferencing]
ITA No.6179/Del/2017
Assessment Year: 2014-15

HYATT INTERNATIONAL
SOUTHWEST ASIA LTD.
Office 301, Level-3, Precinct
3, Dubai International
Financial Centre (DIFC), PO
Box -506727, Dubai,
United Arab Emirates,

Dubai

PAN :AACCH2598H
(Appellant)

VS

ACIT,
Circle-2(1)(1), International
Taxation,
New Delhi

(Respondent)

Appellant by Sh. Ajit Jain, CA
Respondent by Sh. Bhaskar Goswami, CIT
Date of hearing 27.07.2021
Date of pronouncement 27.07.2021

The present appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 28.07.2017 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi.

2. At the outset, learned counsel for the assessee brought to our notice that the issue raised in Ground No. 1 in the present appeal of the assessee is covered against the assessee by the order of the Co-ordinate Bench of the ITAT for assessment year 2013-14.

3. We have heard both the parties through Video Conferencing facility and perused the relevant material on record. We find that identical issue raised in the present appeal has been adjudicated in ITA No. 727/Del/2017 for Assessment Year 2013-14. The relevant portion of the order of Tribunal (supra) is reproduced.

4. Since the issues in dispute raised in Grounds No. 2 & 3 in the present appeal are identical to the issues decided by theTribunal (supra), the issue of attribution of profit to the Permanent Established (PE) is accordingly restored to the file ofAssessing officer for deciding in the light of the direction of the Tribunal in AY 2013-14, as reproduced above. It is needless to mention that adequate opportunity of being heard shall be provided to the assessee. The Grounds No. 2 and 3 of the appeal are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.

5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed partly for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court.

Please find attached the enclosed file for the full judgement