Madras HC: Police Superintendent not Liable For IO’s Delay In Filing Chargesheet or Closure Report  ||  Supreme Court: Provident Fund Dues Have Priority over a Bank’s Claim under the SARFAESI Act  ||  SC Holds Landowners Who Accept Compensation Settlements Cannot Later Seek Statutory Benefits  ||  Supreme Court: Endless Investigations and Long Delays in Chargesheets Can Justify Quashing  ||  Delhi HC: Arbitrator Controls Evidence and Appellate Courts Cannot Reassess Facts  ||  Delhi HC: ED Can Search Anyone Holding Crime Proceeds, not Just Those Named in Complaint  ||  Delhi HC: ED Can Search Anyone Holding Crime Proceeds, not Just Those Named in Complaint  ||  Delhi HC: Economic Offender Cannot Seek Travel Abroad For Medical Treatment When Available In India  ||  SC: Governors and President Have No Fixed Timeline To Assent To Bills; “Deemed Assent” is Invalid  ||  SC: Assigning a Decree For Specific Performance of a Sale Agreement Does Not Require Registration    

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 2025 - All Rights Reserved