+ Ita 590/2015 Commisssioner Of Income Tax v. Mitsubishi Corporation India Pvt Ltd

$~6 to 10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ ITA 590/2015 COMMISSSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Appellant COMMISSSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Appellant ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Ruchir Bhatia, Sr.SC with Ms.Deeksha Gupta, Adv. Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Sr.SC with Ms. Easha and Ms. Hemlata Rawat, Advs for Revenue. Ms.Deeksha Gupta, Adv. Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Sr.SC with Ms. Easha and Ms. Hemlata Rawat, Advs for Revenue. versus MITSUBISHI CORPORATION INDIA PVT LTD ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Mayank Nagi and Mr.Tarun Singh, Advs. Singh, Advs. 7 + ITA 45/2016 PR. CIT-06 PR. CIT-06 ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Ruchir Bhatia, Sr.SC with Ms.Deeksha Gupta, Adv. Ms.Deeksha Gupta, Adv. versus MITSUBISHI CORPORATION INDIA PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Mayank Nagi and Mr.Tarun Singh, Advs. Singh, Advs. 8 + ITA 1119/2017 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-6 ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Ruchir Bhatia, Sr.SC with Ms.Deeksha Gupta, Adv. Ms.Deeksha Gupta, Adv. versus MITSUBISHI CORPORATION INDIA PVT.LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Mayank Nagi and Mr.Tarun Singh, Advs. Singh, Advs. 9 + ITA 159/2017 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Ruchir Bhatia, Sr.SC with versus Ms.Deeksha Gupta, Adv. M/S MITSUBISHI CORPORATION INDIA (P) LTD ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Mayank Nagi and Mr.Tarun Singh, Advs. 10 + ITA 403/2018 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX-6 ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Ruchir Bhatia, Sr.SC with Ms.Deeksha Gupta, Adv. versus MITSBUSHI CORPORATION INDIA PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Mayank Nagi and Mr.Tarun Singh, Advs. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMAHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV O R D E R % 14.03.2024 1.We note that these appeals are concerned with the following questions of law:- (a) Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ["ITAT"] fell into error in holding that Section 40(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 cannot be applied in view of the provisions of the Double Tad Avoidance Agreement between the Indian (sic) and Japan and India and the Us? (b) Whether the ITAT fell in error in reversing the findings of the DRP with respect to the existence of the PEs in India? 2.Learned counsel appearing for the appellants fairly concedes that the aforenoted questions stand answered against the Revenue / appellants in light of the majority opinion rendered in ITA 180/2014. 3.Accordingly and following the aforesaid decision, these appeals shall stand dismissed. YASHWANT VARMA, J. MARCH 14, 2024/MJ PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J.