Essential to prove involvement in physical activities of erection and commissioning of power project to be taxed under special provisions

Voith Siemens Hydro Kraftwerkstechnik GMBH & Co KG Vs. DDIT (ITAT Delhi)–  The Tribunal observed that even though in the contract between the taxpayer and OHPC, the term “supervision” has been given a specific meaning, the conduct of the taxpayer was not supported by any evidence to demonstrate that it had done any thing other than „supervision‟ as understood in its general meaning.  The taxpayer has not been able to prove that it was involved in the physical activities of the business of assembly or erection of the plant or

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.