SC: Appeal U/S 374 CrPC/415 BNSS is Not Maintainable Against Sessions Court's Reversal of Acquittal  ||  SC Asked the Centre to Promote Awareness About the Consequences of Driving With an Expired Licence  ||  SC Explains How a Deceased Christian Wife's Property Devolves under the Indian Succession Act  ||  Supreme Court: Reach Stacker isn't a Motor Vehicle; MACT Claim Not Maintainable  ||  Supreme Court: Lift Makers, Operators and Owners Share Responsibility for User Safety  ||  Patna HC: Pressure to Sign Divorce and Child Custody does not Amount to Cruelty  ||  Bombay HC: Externment under the Police Act Requires Satisfaction About a Gang's Activities  ||  Bombay HC: False Travel Distance Claim Alone Doesn't Constitute Misappropriation  ||  J&K&L High Court: Interest on Delayed Gratuity is Not a Mandatory Pre-Deposit For an Appeal  ||  Meghalaya HC: Meritorious Candidate Cannot Be Denied Admission For a Two-Minute Delay    

Del. HC: Company’s Subsidiary Doesn’t Ipso Facto Constitute its Permanent Establishment - (27 Feb 2025)

DIRECT TAXATION

Del. HC has held that there is no general presumption in law that a subsidiary can never be acknowledged to be a Permanent Establishment (PE). This is since Article 5(8) of India-Finland Double Taxation Treaty itself merely states that the said factor alone shall not be determinative of PE question.

Tags : DELHI HIGH COURT   PERMANENT ESTABLISHMENT   DOUBLE TAXATION TREATY  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved