(Adarsh Kumar Goel, Rohinton Fali Nariman and Navin Sinha, JJ.)
Honda Motor Co. Ltd. Japan, Through its Authorised Representative __________________________________________________ Appellant
v.
Asstt. Director of Income-Tax, Noida & Ors. __________ Respondent(s)
Civil Appeal No.(s). 2833 of 2018 [Arising out of SLP(C) No. 25363 of 2014], decided on March 14, 2018
With
Civil Appeal No.(s). 2834 of 2018 [Arising out of SLP(C) No. 26978/2014], Civil Appeal No.(s). 2835 of 2018 [Arising out of SLP(C) No. 26841/2014], Civil Appeal No.(s). 2836 of 2018 [Arising out of SLP(C) No. 26829/2014], Civil Appeal No.(s). 2837 of 2018 [Arising out of SLP(C) No. 26826/2014], Civil Appeal No.(s). 2838 of 2018 [Arising out of SLP(C) No. 26803/2014], Civil Appeal No.(s). 2839 of 2018 [Arising out of SLP(C) No. 7526/2015], Civil Appeal No.(s). 2840 of 2018 [Arising out of SLP(C) No. 8142/2015], Civil Appeal No.(s). 2833 of 2018
The Order of the court was delivered by
Order
1. Leave granted.
2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
3. In the judgment of this Court dated 24th October, 2017 in Assistant Director of Income Tax-I, New Delhi v. E-Funds IT Soluction Inc., Civil Appeal NO. 6082 of 2015 and connected matters, it has been held that once arm’s length principle has been satisfied, there can be no further profit attributable to a person even if it has a permanent establishment in India.
4. Since the impugned notice for the reassessment is based only on the allegation that the appellant(s) has permanent establishment in India, the notice cannot be sustained once arm’s length price procedure has been followed.
5. Accordingly, the impugned order(s) is set aside and the appeals are allowed.
6. Learned counsel for the Revenue states that he does not have complete instructions. If the Revenue disputes the above factual position, it will be at liberty to move this Court.
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 25363/2014
Honda Motor Co. Ltd. Japan, Through its Authorised Representative __________________________________________________ Appellant
v.
Asstt. Director of Income-Tax, Noida & Ors ___________ Respondent(s)
WITH
SLP(C) No. 7526/2015 (XI)
SLP(C) No. 8142/2015 (XI)
SLP(C) No. 26978/2014 (XI)
SLP(C) No. 26841/2014 (XI)
SLP(C) No. 26829/2014 (XI)
SLP(C) No. 26826/2014 (XI)
SLP(C) No. 26803/2014 (XI)
Date: 14-03-2018 These petitions were called on for hearing today.
(Before Adarsh Kumar Goel, Rohinton Fali Nariman and Navin Sinha, JJ.)
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Parag Tripathi, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Tarun Gulati, Adv.
Mr. Kishore Kunal, Adv.
Mr. Pranav Bansal, Adv.
Mr. Prashant Tahiliani, Adv.
Ms. Anshul Verma, Adv.
Mr. Abhishek Boob, Adv.
Mr. R. Chandrachud, AOR
Mr. Shashi Mathews, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Y.P. Adhyaru, Sr. Adv.
Mr. H.R. Rao, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Arijit Prasad, Adv.
Mr. T.M. Singh, Adv.
Mr. Pravesh Thakur, Adv.
Mrs. Anil Katiyar, AOR
Mr. S.A. Haseeb, Adv.
Mr. Arun Kumar Singh, Adv.
Mr. Niranjana Singh, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
Order
7. Leave granted.
8. In terms of the signed order, the appeals are allowed.
9. Pending applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.
———
