Delhi HC to decide on Whether Payments made by Ranbaxy India to TEVA Israel are taxable [Read Order]
![Delhi HC to decide on Whether Payments made by Ranbaxy India to TEVA Israel are taxable [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/Delhi-High-Court-Payments-Ranbaxy-India-TEVA-Israel-taxable-Taxscan.jpg "Delhi HC to decide on Whether Payments made by Ranbaxy India to TEVA Israel are taxable [Read Order]")
The Delhi is about to decide on whether payments made by Ranbaxy India to TEVA Israel are taxable. The writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India concerns Assessment Year (AY) 2014-15 In the writ petition, a challenge is laid to the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act. In addition, thereto,...
The Delhi is about to decide on whether payments made by Ranbaxy India to TEVA Israel are taxable. The writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India concerns Assessment Year (AY) 2014-15
In the writ petition, a challenge is laid to the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act. In addition, thereto, a challenge is laid to the notice issued under Section 148A(b) of the Act.
The petitioner, Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc, is a company incorporated in the USA. The broad issue which arises for consideration, according to Harish N. Salve, senior counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, is whether payments made by Ranbaxy Laboratories Limited [in short, “Ranbaxy India”] to TEVA Pharmaceuticals Industries Limited, Israel [in short, “TEVA Israel”] are taxable in the hands of the petitioner i.e., TEVA Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. [in short, “TEVA USA”].
It appears that the amended agreement dated 07.12.2011 was signed by the petitioner in favour of TEVA Israel. The petitioner’s case is that the intellectual property rights vest in TEVA Israel and that petitioner is merely a facilitator. According to the petitioner, it is neither entitled to payment, nor has it received the same.
The Bench comprising Justice Rajiv Shakdher and Judtice Tara Vitasta Ganju observed that “According to us, the matter requires examination. We are also told by Mr Salve that there are four writ petitions pending consideration between the same parties and are listed for arguments before the court on 02.05.2023.”
‘The fact that there are other writ petitions also pending consideration between the same parties, qua one issue or the other, is not disputed Mr Sunil Aggarwal, senior standing counsel, who appears on behalf of the respondents/revenue” the Court said.
To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
