 |
|
For business information, annual reports, laws, ordinances, regulations and articles. |
|
|
1 CITv. Visakhapatna Port Trust [1983] 144 ITR 146
(AP). The ITAT, Pakistan in 1998 PTD (Trib.) 3749, bas made the following remarks about
this case:
"Regarding the reliance placed .......in the context of what P.E. postulates, on the
case reported as C.I.T.v. Vishakapatam Port Trust (A.P.) (1983) 144 ITR 146. We find
firstly that it is only an obiter dicta of Jagannadha Rao, J. Secondly, the instant case
is not on all fours with the case (ibid) while respondent, in the instant case, is
deriving income from lease price of the aircrafts that remain the property of the
respondent over the Wet Lease Term and thereafter, and it bas undertaken the maintenance
and operation of the aircrafts by its own personnel to be kept posted in Pakistan over the
lease term, the German Company in the case (ibid) has supplied, under an agreement with
the Port Trust the mechanical equipment, the structural steel-work, the lubrication
system, the rubber belting, the electrical equipment, ballast and spares for installation
of a plant known as "Bucket Wheel Recklaimer", an engineer-erector is delegated
for supervising the total labour, scaffolds etc., water and electricity, at its own cost,
for the erection work, a company incorporated in India is employed as a subcontractor to
fabricate a single thick steel sheet, and certain items that the German Company bas
manufactured in Germany and has despatched to Bombay Port are firmly embedded on the steel
plate by the sub-contractor and are delivered at Visbakhapatnam where the items directly
despatched by the German Company to Visbakbapatnam Port are put on the said plate under
the supervision of the German Engineer."
".......Accordingly, we find on the Łoregoing facts and circumstances of the case,
that the respondent, by virtue of having a fixed place of business in Pakistan in which
the business of the respondent is at least partly carried on by respondent's personnel on
regular basis, has a Permanent Establishment in Pakistan as defined under Article 5 of the
Convention. Consequently, so much of the profits of the respondent, an enterprise of the
contracting State of Romania, carrying on business in the other contracting State of
Pakistan, through Permanent Establishment in Pakistan are taxable in Pakistan, as are
attributable to such Permanent Establishment."
