Ditemukan 3000 data

Urut Berdasarkan
 
Putus : 04-12-2017 — Upload : 12-03-2018
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 2135 B/PK/PJK/2017
Tanggal 4 Desember 2017 — PT. BRIDGESTONE TIRE INDONESIA VS DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK
6854 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • Royalties arising in a Contracting State and paid to aresident of the other the Contracting State may be taxed inthat other Contracting State.2. However, such royalties may also be taxed in theContracting State in which they arise, and according to thelaws of that Contracting State, but if the recipient is thebeneficial owner of the royalties the tax so charged shall notexceed 10 percent of the gross amount of the royalties.3.
    The provisions of paragraphs 1 and 2 shall not apply if thebeneficial owner of the royalties, being a resident of aContracting State, carries on business in the otherContracting State in which the royalties arise, through apermanent establishment situated therein, or perForms inthat other Contracting State independent personal servicesfrom a fixed base situated therein, and the right or propertyin respect of which the royalties are paid is effectivelyconnected with such permanent establishment or
    Royalties shall be deemed to arise in a Contracting Statewhen the payer is that Contracting State itself, a politicalsubdivision or a local authority thereof, or a resident of thatContracting State.
    Where, however, the person paying theroyalties, whether he is a resident of a Contracting State ornot, has in a Contracting State a permanent establishmentor a fixed base in connection with which the liability to paythe royalties was incurred, and such royalties are borne bysuch permanent establishment or fixed base, then suchroyalties shall be deemed to arise in the Contracting Statein which the permanent establishment or fixed base issituated.Where, by reason of a special relationship between thepayer
    In such case, the excesspart of the payments shall remain taxable according to thelaws of each Contracting State, due regard being had to theother provisions of this Agreement.Sedangkan Pasal 12 P3B Indonesia Jepang versi BahasaIndonesia mengatur sebagai berikut:1.Royalti yang berasal dari suatu Negara dan dibayarkankepada penduduk Negara lainnya, dikenakan pajak diNegara lainnya itu;Namun demikian, royalti tersebut dapat juga dikenakanpajak di Negara dimana royalti itu berasal, sesuai denganperundangundangan
Register : 22-12-2017 — Putus : 09-01-2018 — Upload : 23-04-2021
Putusan PN Ngabang Nomor 25/Pid.Sus-Anak/2017/PN NBA
Tanggal 9 Januari 2018 — Terdakwa
183101
  • Sedangkan untuk akun facebook dariTerdakwa anak ABDULLAH JAISYU MUHAMMAD Saksi tidakmengetahui dengan pasti kenapa dibanned.Bahwa saksi menjadi simpatisan ISIS ( Islamic State of Irag and Syiria )sekira tahun 2014;Bahwa saksi menjadi simpatisan ISIS ( Islamic State of Iraq and Syiria )dikarenakan menurut Saksi segala sesuatu yang dilakukan oleh ISIS( Islamic State of Iraq and Syiria ) berdasarkan syariat Islam;Bahwa saksi mendapatkan informasi terkait ISIS ( Islamic State of Iraqand Syiria ) dari
    Atjehcyber.net;Bahwa anak ABDULLAH JAISYU MUHAMMAD merupakan salah satusimpatisan ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syiria ) seperti Saksi;Bahwa Sdr.ABDULLAH JAISYU MUHAMMAD menjadi simpatisanISIS( Islamic State of Iraq and Syiria ) sejak menjalani sekolah di PondokHalaman 19 dari 62 Putusan Nomor 25/Pid.SusAnak/2017/PN.NbaPesantren Miftahul Huda tahun 2013, Pondok Pesantren Ibnu Masudtahun 2014, Pondok pesantren ansharrullah 2015;Bahwa anak ABDULLAH JAISYU MUHAMMAD tidak menyelesaikanpendidikannya
    penjelasan yang Saksijelakan kepada mereka pun tidak berpengaruh terhadap pandanganmereka terkait Daulah Islamiyah / ISIS ( Islamic State of Iraq and Syiria ).
    Bahwa dengan berdoa dan menjelaskan kepada para pihak yangmenganggap atau beranggapan buruk mengenai Daulah Islamiyah / ISIS( Islamic State of Iraq and Syiria ) kepada saya mengenai apa yang sayaketahui terkait Daulah Islamiyah / ISIS ( Islamic State of Iraq and Syiria )yang sebenarnya agar para pihak tersebut dapat mempertimbangkanpangangan buruknya tersebut, dan perlu saya jelaskan sampaidengan saat ini hanya keluarga dari pihak istri yang mempertanyakanmengenai hal tersebut, dan penjelasan yang
    saya jelakan kepadamereka pun tidak berpengaruh terhadap pandangan mereka terkaitDaulah Islamiyah / ISIS ( Islamic State of Iraq and Syiria);Atas keterangan saksi tersebut terdakwa membenarkannya;Menimbang, bahwa dipersidangan Penuntut Umum telah membacakanketerangan ahli dibawah sumpah yang pada pokoknya yaitu:1.
Register : 02-06-2017 — Putus : 19-07-2017 — Upload : 19-09-2017
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 1218 B/PK/PJK/2017
Tanggal 19 Juli 2017 — DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK vs BUT BANGKOK BANK PUBLIC COMPANY LIMITED;
136109 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • Sesuai denganpenghindaran pajak berganda (P3B) Indonesia Thailand yangmenyebutkan bahwa:"Interest arising in a Contracting State and paid to a resident of the otherContracting State may be taxed in that other state";Sehingga Pemohon Banding melakukan pemotongan PPh 26 atas bebanbunga bukan pada saat pencatatan (accrual), melainkan pada saat terjadipembayaran;Bahwa Pemohon Banding tidak setuju dengan pendapat Peneliti Keberatanyang menyatakan bahwa saat terutangnya penghasilan tersebut jugaditentukan
    Namun, pasal tersebuttidak mengatur saat terutangnya Pajak Penghasilan atas pembayaranbunga tersebut;Bahwa menurut Pemohon Banding, article 11 angka 1 adalah pasal yangtepat untuk menentukan saat terutangnya penghasilan atas bunga sesuaidengan bunyi P3B, yakni:Interest arising in a Contracting State and paid to a resident of the otherContracting State may be taxed in that other state";sehingga Pemohon Banding melakukan pemotongan PPh 26 atas bebanbunga bukan pada saat pencatatan (accrual), melainkan
    Article 11 (interest) Agreement Between The Government of TheRepublic of Indonesia and The Government of Kingdom of Thailand:(1) Interest arising in a Contracting State and paid to a resident of theother Contracting State may be taxed in that other State.(2) However,a.
    Bahwa menurut Termohon Peninjauan Kembali (semulaPemohon Banding), article 11 angka 1 adalah Pasal yangtepat untuk menentukan saat terutangnya penghasilan atasbunga sesuai dengan bunyi P3B, yakni: "/nterest arising in aContracting State and paid to a resident of the otherContracting State may be taxed in that other state", sehinggaTermohon Peninjauan Kembali (semula Pemohon Banding)melakukan pemotongan PPh 26 atas beban bunga bukanHalaman 17 dari 26 halaman Putusan Nomor 1218/B/PK/PJK/2017pada saat
    may be taxedin that other State, Pemohon Peninjauan Kembali (semulaTerbanding) berpendapat sebagai berikut:a.
Putus : 30-06-2016 — Upload : 13-09-2016
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 556/B/PK/PJK/2016
Tanggal 30 Juni 2016 — DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK vs. PT. BAYER MATERIALSCIENCE INDONESIA
4527 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • maybe taxed in the Contracting State in which they arise andaccording to the laws of that State, but if the recipient is thebeneficial owner of the royalties or of the fees for technicalservices the tax so charged shall not exceed:(a) in the case of royalties as defined in paragraph 2 subparagraph (a) 15% of the gross amount of such royalties;(b) in the case of royalties as defined in paragraph 2 subparagraph (b) 10% of the gross amount of such royalties;and(c) in the case of fees for technical
    The provisions of paragraph 1 of this Article shall not apply if thebeneficial owner of the royalties or fees for technical services,being a resident of a Contracting State, carries on business inthe other Contracting State in which the royalties or fees fortechnical services arise through a permanent establishmentsituated therein, or performs in that other State independentpersonal services from a fixed base situated therein, and theright, property or contract in respect of which the royalties orfees
    Royalties and fees for technical services shall be deemed toarise in a Contracting State when the payer is that State itself, aLand, a political subdivision, a local authority or a resident ofthat State.
    Where, however, the person paying the royalties orfees for technical services, whether he is a resident of aContracting State or not, has in a Contracting State a permanentestablishment or fixed base in connection with which theobligation to make the payments was incurred, and thepayments are borne by that permanent establishment or fixedbase, then the royalties or fees for technical services shall bedeemed to arise in the Contracting State in which the permanentestablishment or fixed base is situated
    In suchcase, the excess part of the payments shall remain taxableaccording to the laws of each Contracting State, due regardbeing had to the other provisions of this Agreement.7.
Putus : 24-09-2013 — Upload : 13-12-2018
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 280 B/PK/PJK/2013
Tanggal 24 September 2013 — DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK VS PT. EKAMAS FORTUNA
5275 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • Putusan Nomor 280/B/PK/PJK/2013For the purposes of this Agreement an individual, who is a memberof a diplomatic or consular mission of one of the two States in theother State or in a third State and who is a national of the sendingState, shall be deemed to be a resident of the sending State if he issubmitted therein to the same obligations in respect of taxes onincome as are residents of that State:Article 11:1.Interest arising in one of the two States and paid to a resident ofthe other State may
    be taxed in that other State,However, such interest may also be taxed in the State in which itarises and according to the laws of that State, but if the beneficialowner of the interest is a resident of the other State, the tax socharged shall not exceed 10 per cent of the gross amount of theinterest,Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph 2, interest arising inone of the two States shall be taxable only in the other State to theextent that such interest is derived by:(i) the Government of the
    other State, including politicalsubdivisions and local authorities thereof; or(ii) the Central Bank of the other State; or(iii) a financial institution owned or controlled by the Government ofthe other State, including political subdivisions and localauthorities thereof; or(iv) any resident of the other State with respect to debtclaimsguaranteed or insured by the Government of the other Stateincluding political subdivisions and local authorities thereof, theCentral Bank of the other State or any
    Where an item of income is received by aresident of a Contracting State acting in the capacity of agent ornominee it would be inconsistent with the object and purpose ofthe Convention for the State of source to grant relief or exemptionmerely on account of the status of the immediate recipient of theincome as a resident of the other Contracting State.
    It would beequally inconsistent with the object and purpose of the Conventionfor the State of source to grant relief or exemption where aresident of a Contracting State, otherwise than through an agencyor nominee relationship, simply acts as a conduit for anotherperson who in fact receives the benefit of the income concerned.For these reasons, the report from the Committee on Fiscal AffairsHalaman 23 dari 34 halaman.
Register : 13-01-2015 — Putus : 20-01-2015 — Upload : 03-02-2015
Putusan PN MALANG Nomor 15/Pdt.P/2015/PN.Mlg
Tanggal 20 Januari 2015 — DJONNY SAKSONO dan SHIRLEY SUWANTINNA
182130
  • . & ASSOCIATES, diberi tanda bukti P 6;Fotocopy Surat Keterangan Perkawinan, Nomor : 71/KONS/Perk/IH/2014 tanggal 05Maret 2014 yang dikeluarkan oleh Konsulat Jenderal Republik Indonesia Los Angeles,tertulis atas nama antara DJONNY SAKSONO dengan SHIRLEY SUWANTINNA,diberi tanda bukti P7;8 Fotocopy Akta Perkawinan (Marriage Certificate) tanggal 23 Juni 2013 yangdikeluarkan oleh State of Nevada, County of Clark, No : 20130623000382010, diberitanda bukti P8;9 Fotocopy Akta Perkawinan (Marriage Certificate
    ) tanggal 23 Juni 2013 yangdikeluarkan oleh State of Nevada, County of Clark, No : 20130623000382010 denganterjemahan yang dikeluarkan oleh PT.
    Pantas Jaya Departement, diberi tanda bukti P9;10 Fotocopy Surat Tanda Bukti Pelaporan Perkawinan Nomor 19/2014 tanggal 23Desember 2014 tertulis atas nama DJONNY SAKSONO dengan SHIRLEYSUWANTINNA, yang dikeluarkan oleh Dinas Kependudukan dan Pencatatan SipilKota Malang , diberi tanda bukti P10;11 Fotocopy Certification yang dikeluarkan oleh Secretary of State, State of Nevada, diberitanda bukti P11Menimbang, bahwa fotocopy surat bukti bertanda P1 sampai dengan P11 tersebuttelah diberi materai secukupnya
    Indonesia diluar wilayah negara kesatuan RepublikIndonesia wajib di catat pada instansi yang berwenang di negara setempat dan di laporkan padaperwakilan Republik Indonesia ;Ayat (3) di nyatakan bahwa Perwakilan Republik Indoenesia sebagaimana dimaksudpada ayat (2) mencatat peristiwa perkawinan dalam register akta perkawinan dan menerbitkankutipan akta perkawinan ;Menimbang, bahwa dari bukti surat yang bertanda P9 berupa Akta Perkawinan(Marriage Certificate) tanggal 23 Juni 2013 yang dikeluarkan oleh State
Register : 26-01-2017 — Putus : 02-03-2017 — Upload : 06-04-2017
Putusan PT JAKARTA Nomor 23/PID.SUS/2016/PT. DKI
Tanggal 2 Maret 2017 — JUNEDI als. JJ
383234
  • Tauhid mengenai syarat, rukun dan pembatal kelslaman ;Bahwa pada saat terdakwa mengikuti Jemaah Ansorud Tauhid(JAT) terdapat perpecahan antara yang mendukung S (IslamicHalaman4 dari 27 halaman Putusan nomor 23/Pid.Sus/2016/PT.DKIState) di Suriah dan yang tidak mendukung S(Islamic State).Kemudian terdakwa bersama saksi CUNAEDI keluar dari JATkarena terdakwa dan saksi CUNAEDI termasuk yang mendukungIS (lslamic State) ;Bahwa untuk membentuk wadah bagi pendukung S(Islamic State)maka pada bulan Januari
    Namunterdakwamemutuskan untuk tetap mengadakan kajian di mushola BaitulMu'minah pada bulan berikutnya dengan menggunakan uang terdakwapribadi dengan tujuan untuk menyamakan pemahaman dalammendukung Khilafah (Islamic State) ;Halaman9 dari 27 halaman Putusan nomor 23/Pid.Sus/2016/PT.DKI4.
    Sudah sejauh mana dakwah yang diadakan oleh masingmasingmudriyah dalam mendukung IS (Islamic State) ;2. Sudah berapa banyak personel / anggota yang dimiliki oleh masingmasing mudriyah ;Bahwa seluruh mudriyah se Jawa Barat memiliki pemahaman yangsama tentang IS (Islamic State) ;Disamping melaksanakan kegiatan berdakwah dan mengikuti kajian,kegiatan yang diadakan oleh Jemaah Anshor Khilafah adalah melatihfisik dengan cara yakni mendaki gunung dan berenang.
    Sebagai AMIR Tertinggi IS ( Islamic State ) di Indonesia yaitu ABUBAKAR BAASYIR dan OMAN ABDULRAHMAN (warga binaan LapasNusa Kambangan) ;2. Bertindak sebagai Pendakwah adalah ustad FAUZAN AL ANSORY.Kemudian dibawahnya ada tiga wilayah masing masing :Wilayah Jawa Barat dijabat oleh ustad KHAIRUL ANAM sebagai AMIR /Ketua wilayahYang membawahi beberapa MUDRIYAH atau Kabupatenyakni :1.
    ) ;Sudah berapa banyak personel / anggota yang dimiliki oleh masingmasing mudriyah ;Bahwa seluruh mudriyah se Jawa Barat memiliki pemahaman yangsama tentang IS (Islamic State).
Register : 13-01-2015 — Putus : 09-02-2015 — Upload : 01-06-2015
Putusan PA SAMARINDA Nomor 139/Pdt.G/2015/PA.Smd.
Tanggal 9 Februari 2015 — PENGGUGAT VS TERGUGAT
123
  • No. 139/041.G/2015 PA Sind. tanggal 9 Pebruati LOS viwewsiserven mosscsiccsassuinanmesneneersaewenenaneaaunveeens state 1Kutipan Akta Nikah Nomor : 1166/121/IX/2004 tanggal 23September 2004;Bahwa setelah pernikahan tersebut Penggugat dan Tergugatbertempat tinggal di rumah paman Tergugat di , Kota Samarindaselama 1 tahun, kemudian pindah ke rumah tante Tergugat di , KotaSamarinda selama 7 tahun dan terakhir pindah ke rumah orangtuaPenggugat di Kecamatan Kamal, Kabupaten Bangkalan selama 2tahun;Bahwa
    No. 139/041.G/2015 PA Sind. tanggal 9 Pebruati LOS viwewsiserven mosscsiccsassuinanmesneneersaewenenaneaaunveeens state 2Berdasarkan alasan/dalildalil tersebut diatas, Penggugat mohonkepada Ketua Pengadilan Agama Samarinda Cq. Majelis Hakim yangmemeriksa dan mengadili perkara ini, untuk menjatuhkan putusan yangamarnya sebagai berikut :1. Mengabulkan gugatan Penggugat;2. Menjatuhkan talak satu ba'in shughra Tergugat (Tergugat) terhadapPenggugat (Penggugat);3.
    No. 139/041.G/2015 PA Sind. tanggal 9 Pebruati LOS viwewsiserven mosscsiccsassuinanmesneneersaewenenaneaaunveeens state 93. Kitab Ghoyatul Marom yang berbunyi:Ail clill aye Gib leas Aas jl Are) pre aLalhlsArtinya : "Dan ketika istri sudah sangat tidak senang terhadapsuaminya, maka Hakim dibolehkan menjatuhkan talaksatu suami";4.
    No. 139/041.G/2015 PA Sind. tanggal 9 Pebruati LOS viwewsiserven mosscsiccsassuinanmesneneersaewenenaneaaunveeens state 10kedua UndangUndang nomor 50 tahun 2009, maka seluruh biayaperkara dibebankan kepada penggugat;Mengingat, segala ketentuan perundangundangan yang berlaku,dan dalil syar'i yang bersangkutan dengan perkara ini;MENGADILIMenyatakan tergugat yang telah dipanggil dengan resmi danparutuntuk menghdap dipersidangan, tidak hadir;NeMengabulkan gugatan penggugat verstek;oO.
    No. 139/041.G/2015 PA Sind. tanggal 9 Pebruati LOS viwewsiserven mosscsiccsassuinanmesneneersaewenenaneaaunveeens state iHakim Anggota,Drs. Fathurrachman, MHHakim Anggota,Drs.Muh.Rifai, MHPerincian Biaya Perkara :Ketua Majelis,Drs. Tamimudari, MHPanitera Pengganti,Muhammad Rizal, SH 1. Biaya pendaftaran : Rp 30.000.2. Biaya proses : Rp 50.000.3. Biaya panggilan : Rp245.000,4. Biaya redaksi :Rp 5.000.5.
Register : 23-05-2012 — Putus : 18-04-2012 — Upload : 23-05-2012
Putusan PN SURAKARTA Nomor 16/Pid.Sus/2012/PN.Ska
Tanggal 18 April 2012 — ALMATIUS ARYANTO als ARY
6512
  • Perkara : PDM07/0.3.11/Euh.2/02/2012 tertanggal 8 Pebruari2012, sebagai berikut : Bahwa ia Terdakwa ALMATIUS ARYANTO als ARY pada hari Rabutanggal 07 Desember 2011 sekira jam 15.30 WIB atau setidaknya pada waktu laindalam bulan Desember 2011, bertempat di kantor PT FIRST STATE Jl.
    FIRST STATE diJ.Bhayangkara,Surakarta; e Bahwa kemudian sekitar pukul 23.00 Wib, Terdakwamenggunakan shabu tersebut di kamar mandi rumahTerdakwa di Kampung Senden RT.05/RW.05, KelurahanTohudan, Kecamatan Colomadu, Kabupaten Karanganyardengan cara dimasukkan ke dalam pipet kaca kemudiandipanaskan diatas api yang terbuat dari korek api gassehingga mengeluarkan asap, selanjutnya asap dihisapoleh Terdakwa melalui mulut + menggunakane Bahwa Terdakwa menggunakan shabu sejak awal Maret2011 hingga bulan
    First State Jl.
    Setelah uang terkirim, Terdakwa mendapat alamat untuk mengambil shabuyaitu di daerah Banyuanyar dekat Gedung Saba Buana Surakarta, setelah mendapatkansabu tersebut Terdakwa kembali ke kantomya di PTFirst State di Jl. BhayangkaraSurakarta; Bahwa kemudian sekitar pukul 23.00 WIB Terdakwa menggunakan sabu tersebutdi kamar mandi rumah Terdakwa di Kampung Senden RT,05 RW.05 Kelurahan Tohudan,Kec.
Register : 03-01-2017 — Putus : 21-02-2017 — Upload : 18-05-2017
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 57 B/PK/PJK/2017
Tanggal 21 Februari 2017 — DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK VS PT. SINARINDO GERBANGMAS;
7361 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • For the purposes of this Agreement an individual, who is a member of adiplomatic or consular mission of one of the two States in the other Stateor in a third State and who is a national of the sending State, shall bedeemed to be a resident of the sending State if he is submitted therein tothe same obligations in respect of taxes on income as are residents of thatState;Article 111.
    Interest arising in one of the two States and paid to a resident of theother State may be taxed in that other State.2. However, such interest may also be taxed in the State in which itarises and according to the laws of that State, but if the beneficialowner of the interest is a resident of the other State, the tax so chargedshall not exceed 10 per cent of the gross amount of the interest.3.
    Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph 2, interest ansing in oneof the two States shall be taxable only in the other State to the extentthat such interest is derived by:(i) The Government of the other State, including political subdivisionsand local authorities thereof; or(ii) The Central Bank of the other State; or(iii) A financial institution owned or controlled by the Government ofthe other State, including political subdivisions and localauthorities thereof; orHalaman 11 dari 36 halaman
    Putusan Nomor 57 B/PK/PJK/2017(iv) Any resident of the other State with respect to debtclaimsguaranteed or insured by the Government of the other Stateincluding political subdivisions and local authorities thereof, theCentral Bank of the other State or any financial institution ownedor controlled by that Government.4.
    Relief or exemption in respect of an item of income is granted bythe State of source to a resident of the other Contracting State to avoidin whole or in part the double taxation that would otherwise arise fromthe concurrent taxation of that income by the State of residence.Where an item of income is received by a resident of a ContractingState acting in the capacity of agent or nominee it would beinconsistent with the object and purpose of the Convention for theState of source to grant relief or
Register : 02-10-2012 — Putus : 18-08-2014 — Upload : 25-06-2015
Putusan PENGADILAN PAJAK Nomor 54360/PP/M.XIA/13/2014
Tanggal 18 Agustus 2014 — Pemohon Banding dan Terbanding
27559
  • SIPEF, NV memiliki Certificate Of Domicile (COD) dari negaranyasebagaimana diatur dalam Pasal 14 ayat (1) Peraturan Direktur Jenderal Pajak NomorPER61/P3/2009 tentang Penerapan Persetujuan Penghindaran Pajak Berganda (P3B) antaraPemerintah Indonesia dengan Negara lain.bahwa di dalam P3B antara Indonesia dengan Belgia pada Pasal 14 pada pokoknya menyatakan :Income derived by a resident of a Contracting State in respect of professional services or otheractivities of an independent character shall be
    taxable only in that State except in the followingcircumstances, when such income may also be taxed in the other Contracting State:( if he has a fixed base regularly available to him in the other Contracting State forthe purpose of performing his activities; in that case, only so much of the income asis attributable to that fixed base may be taxed in that other Contracting State; orif his stay in the other Contracting State is for a period or periods amounting to orexceeding in the aggregate 91
    days within any period of twelve months; in thatcase, only so much of the income as is derived from his activities performed in thatother State may be taxed in that other State.The term "professional services" includes especially independent scientific, literary, artistic,educational or teaching activities as well as the independent activities of physicians, lawyers,engineers, architects, dentists and accountants.bahwa dalam hal iniS.A.
Putus : 14-06-2017 — Upload : 19-09-2017
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 1740/B/PK/PJK/2016
Tanggal 14 Juni 2017 — DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK vs PT. PAITON ENERGY
9661 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • taxation therein by reason of his domicile, residence, place ofmanagement or any other criterion of a similar nature;For the purposes of this Agreement an individual, who is a member ofa diplomatic or consular mission of one of the two States in the otherState or in a third State and who is a national of the sending State,shall be deemed to be a resident of the sending State if he issubmitted therein to the same obligations in respect of taxes onincome as are residents of that State;Article 111.Interest
    arising in one of the two States and paid to a resident of theother State may be taxed in that other State.However, such interest may also be taxed in the State in which itarises and according to the laws of that State, but if the beneficialowner of the interest is a resident of the other State, the tax socharged shall not exceed 10 per cent of the gross amount of theinterest.Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph 2, interest arising in oneof the two States shall be taxable only in the other
    State to the extentthat such interest is derived by:(i) the Government of the other State, including politicalsubdivisions and local authorities thereof; or(ii) the Central Bank of the other State; or(iii) a financial institution owned or controlled by the Government ofthe other State, including political subdivisions and localauthorities thereof; or(iv) any resident of the other State with respect to debtclaimsguaranteed or insured by the Government of the other Stateincluding political subdivisions
    Putusan Nomor 1740/B/PK/PJK/2016Central Bank of the other State or any financial institution ownedor controlled by that Government.4.
    Notwithstanding the provision of paragraph 2, interest arising in oneof the other Stares shall be taxable only in the other State if thebeneficial owner of the interest is a resident of the other Stateand if the interest is paid on a loan made for a period of morethan 2 years or is paid in connection with the sale on credit of anyindustrial, commercial or scientific equipment.5.
Putus : 14-09-2016 — Upload : 10-11-2016
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 1020/B/PK/PJK/2016
Tanggal 14 September 2016 — DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK VS PT. WIRAKARYA SAKTI
23686 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • Interest arising in one of the two States and paid to a resident of the otherState may be taxed in that other State.2. However, such interest may also be taxed in the State in which it arisesand according to the laws of that State, but if the Beneficial Owner of theinterest is a resident of the other State, the tax so charged shall notexceed 10 per cent of the gross amount of the interest.3.
    Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph 2, interest ansing in one ofthe two States shall be taxable only in the other State to the extent thatsuch interest is derived by:(i) the Government of the other State, including political subdivisions andlocal authorities thereof; or(ii) the Central Bank of the other State; or(iii) a financial institution owned or controlled by the Government of theother State, including political subdivisions and local authoritiesthereof; or(iv) any resident of the other
    State with respect to debtclaims guaranteedor insured by the Government of the other State including politicalsubdivisions and local authorities thereof, the Central Bank of theother State or any financial institution owned or controlled by thatGovernment.4.
    Commentary on Article 11 Paragraph 9the State of source is not obliged to give up taxing rights overinterest income merely because that income wasimmediatelyreceived by a resident of a State with which the State ofsource had concluded a convention.
    Commentary on Article 11 Paragraph 10veveee It would be equally inconsistent with the object and purpose ofthe Convention for the State of source to grant relief or exemptionwhere a resident of a Contracting State, otherwise than through anagency or nominee relationship, simply acts as a conduit for anotherperson who in fact receives the benefit of the income concerned.
Register : 25-06-2020 — Putus : 22-10-2020 — Upload : 14-08-2021
Putusan PN MEDAN Nomor 1625/Pid.Sus/2020/PN Mdn
Tanggal 22 Oktober 2020 — Penuntut Umum:
ABDUL HAKIM SORI MUDA HRP.SH
Terdakwa:
T. SUHARDI Alias AGAM
426164
  • Aksara No 144145 Medan State Kec. Percut SeiTuan Kab. Deli Serdang; Bahwa Saksi tidak mempunyai hubungan kekeluargaan denganTerdakwa T. Suhardi Alias Agam namun pada hari Selasa Tanggal 11November 2019 Saksi mendatangi Hotel Nusa INN di JI. Aksara No 144145 Medan State Kec. Percut Sei Tuan Kab. Deli Serdang. Memesankamar No 103. dan memesan wanita yang menyediakan jasa ST (ShortTime) kepada Terdakwa T.
    Aksara No 144145 Medan State Kec.Percut Sei Tuan Kab. Deli Serdang pada tanggal 11 November 2019 untukmemesan kamar dengan tujuan ingin memesan jasa seks Short Time (ST)perempuan penyedia jasa seks. Kemudian Saksi akan menggunakan jasaseks Nurul Putri Agus Tyas Alias Siska sedangkan Sylvia Maya SariGinting akan Saksi kenalkan kepada teman Saksi. dan Saksi akanmenggunakan jasa seks pada tanggal 12 november 2019 di Hotel NusaINN di Jl.Aksara No 144145 Medan State Kec. Percut Sei Tuan Kab.
    Suhardi Alias Agam sebagai upa ataufee; Saksi tidak ada menyerahkan uang kepada Nurul Putri Agus Tyas AliasSiska Pada tanggal 12 Nopember 2019 dari Kamar Nomor 103 Hotel NusaINN di JI.Aksara No 144+145 Medan State Kec. Percut Sei Tuan Kab. DeliSerdang, namun uang pembayaran seks Saksi serahkan kepadaTerdakwa T.
    Suhardi Alias Agam; Bahwa Barang bukti yang dapat di sita dari tersangka Terdakwa T.Suhardi Alias Agam saat dilakukan penangkapan Pada 12 Nopember2019 dari Kamar Nomor 103 Hotel Nusa INN di Jl.Aksara No 144+145Medan State Kec. Percut Sei Tuan Kab. Deli Serdang adalah : 2 (dua)buah kondom Merk Sutra.
    Dan tugas Terdakwa sebagai kasiradalah menerima tamu, menerima pembayaran biaya kamar dari tamu,merekap hasil usaha / omzet perhari, melaporkan hasil usaha / omzetkepada pemilik Hotel, dan menyerahkan langsung ke pemilik Hotel an.Alexander Lie; Bahwa Fungsi / fasilitas yang ada di Hotel Nusa INN Jl Aksara No 144145 Desa Medan State Kec.
Register : 11-01-2016 — Putus : 17-03-2016 — Upload : 13-09-2016
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 47 B/PK/PJK/2016
Tanggal 17 Maret 2016 — DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK VS PT. SEBANGUN BUMI ANDALAS WOOD INDUSTRIES;
3921 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • Interest arising in one of the two States and paid to a resident ofthe other State may be taxed in other State;b. However, such interst may also be taxed in the State in which itarises according to the laws of that State, but if the beneficialowner of the interst is a resident of the other State, the tax socharged shall not exceed 10 percent of the gross amount of theinterest;bahwa Terjemahan Pasal 11 tersebut adalah sebagai berikut :a.
    may be taxed in that other State.Pasal 11 ayat (1):Bunga yang timbul di salah satu Negara dan dibayarkan kepadapenduduk Negara lainnya dapat dikenakan pajak di Negara lainnya.Article 11 (2):However, such interest may also be taxed in the State in which itarises and according to the laws of that State, but if the beneficialowner of the interest is a resident of the other State, the tax so chargedshall not exceed 10 per cent of the gross amount of the interest.Pasal 11 ayat (2):Namun demikian, bunga
    Putusan Nomor 47/B/PK/PJK/20162.4.2.5.perundangundangan Negara tersebut; akan tetapi, apabila pemilikmanfaat dari bunga tersebut adalah penduduk Negara lainnya, makapajak yang dikenakan tidak akan melebihi 10% (Sepuluh persen) danjumlah bruto bunga.Article 11 (4):Notwithstanding the provision of paragraph 2, interest arising in one ofthe two States shall be taxable only in the other State if the beneficialowner of the interest is a resident of the other State and if the interestis paid on a loan
    Interest arising in a Contracting State and paid to a resident of theother Contracting State may be taxed in that other state;b.
    However, subject to the provisions of paragraph 3, such interestmay also be tmed in the Contracting State ini which it arises andaccording to the law of that state, but if the recipient is thebeneficial owner of the interest the tax so charged shall not exceed10 per cent of the goss amount of the interest.Bahwa huruf a, mengatur bahwa tempat kedudukan penerimapenghasilan bunga (negara domisili) dapat mengenakan pajak ataspenghasilan bunga tersebut.
Register : 15-03-2012 — Putus : 25-11-2013 — Upload : 25-03-2014
Putusan PENGADILAN PAJAK Nomor Put-48427/PP/M.V/13/2013
Tanggal 25 Nopember 2013 — Pemohon Banding dan Terbanding
221109
  • Dividends paid by a company which is a resident of a ContractingState to a resident of the other Contracting State may be taxed in thatother State.2.
    However, such dividends may also be taxed in the Contracting Stateof which the company paying the dividends is a resident andaccording to the laws of that State, but if the recipient is thebeneficial owner of the dividends the tax so charged shall not exceed:(a) 10% of the gross amount of the dividends if the beneficial owneris a company (other than a partnership) which holds directly atleast 25% of the capital of the company paying the dividends,(b) 15% of the gross amount of the dividends in all
    The term "dividends" as used in this Article means income fromshares, Jouissance shares or "jouissance" rights, mining shares,founders shares or other rights, not being debtclaims, participatingin profits, as well as income from other corporate rights which issubjected to the same taxation treatment as income from shares bythe laws of the State of which the company making the distribution isa resident.bahwa dalam persidangan, Majelis menanyakan kepada Pemohon Bandingmengapa COD tidak disampaikan
Register : 29-08-2019 — Putus : 23-09-2019 — Upload : 21-10-2019
Putusan PT SEMARANG Nomor 473/PDT/2019/PT SMG
Tanggal 23 September 2019 — Pembanding/Penggugat : PHILIP alias PHILIP BUDIHARDJO Diwakili Oleh : SYAMSU ALAM HASHAB, SH dan Rekan
Terbanding/Tergugat : MEGA YULIANTI
495146
  • p> Dalam Eksepsi

    • Menolak Eksepsi dari Tergugat untuk seluruhnya;

    Dalam Pokok Perkara

    1. Mengabulkan gugatan Penggugat untuk sebagian ;
    2. Menyatakan bahwa kesepakatan antara Penggugat dan Tergugat tentang Tanggung Jawab Pengasuhan Anak yang tertuang dalam Alokasi Tanggung Jawab Orang Tua - Pengambilan Keputusan Dan Rencana Induk yang merupaka bagian yang tidak terpisahkan dari Putusan Judisial State
    Illinois Circuit County of Winnebago Nomor 2016 D 48 adalah sah dan berharga ;
  • Menyatakan bahwa Tergugat telah melakukan Perbuatan Melawan Hukum yang merugikan Penggugat ;
  • Menyatakan bahwa hak pengasuhan anak dilakukan secara bersama antara Penggugat dan Tergugat sebagaimana telah disepakati tentang pengasuhan anak yang tertuang dalam Alokasi Tanggung Jawab Orang Tua - Pengambilan Keputusan Dan Rencana Induk yang merupakan bagian yang tidak terpisahkan dari Putusan Judisial State
    of Illinois Circuit County of Winnebago Nomor 2016 D 48 ;
  • Menghukum Tergugat untuk mematuhi kesepakatan yang telah dibuatnya sebagaimana tertuang dalam Alokasi Tanggung Jawab Orang Tua - Pengambilan Keputusan Dan Rencana Induk yang merupakan bagian yang tidak terpisahkan dari Putusan Judisial State of Illinois Circuit County of Winnebago Nomor 2016 D 48;
  • Dalam Rekonvensi :

    • Menyatakan gugatan Penggugat Rekonvensi/Tergugat
      Bahwa semula Penggugat dengan Tergugat mempunyai hubungan suamiisteri yang melakukan perkawinan secara sah pada hari Jumat tanggal 14Pebruari 2003 di COUNTY OF WAYNE, STATE OF MICHIGAN danselanjutnya tinggal bersama di STATE OF MICHIGAN;2. Bahwa dalam perkawinan Penggugat dan Tergugat tersebut melahirkanseorang anak perempuan bernama CLARISSA GRACE YULIANTI, lahir diBeloit Rock (Amerika) tanggal, 28 Januari 2015;3.
      Bahwa setelahClarissa Grace Yulianti lahir, Penggugat dan Tergugatsepakat bercerai dimuka JUDICIAL STATE OF ILLINOIS CIRCUIT COUNTYOF WINNEBAGO (Peradilan Pemerintahan Provinsi Illinois KotaWinnebago), Amerika;4. Bahwa dalam perkara di Peradilan (point3) tersebut di atas, selanjutnyadalam putusannya bernomor : 2016 D 48 yang disahkan pada tanggal, 11November 2018 diputuskan sebagai berikut :1. Tergugat telah membatalkan niat untuk pindah ke luar negeri(Indonesia);2.
      Menyatakan bahwa putusan Judicial State Of Illinois Circuit County OfWinnebago (Peradilan Pemerintahan Provinsi Illinois Kota Winnebago),Amerika bernomor : 2016 D 48 yang disahkan pada tanggal, 11 Agustus2018 yang bersifat kesepakatan yang dilakukan oleh Penggugat bersamaTergugat adalah sah dan berharga;3.
      Menyatakan pula bahwa perbuatan Tergugat mangkir dari putusanJudicial State Of Illionis Circuit County Of Winnebago (PeradilanPemerintahan Provinsi Illinois Kota Winnebago), Amerika bernomor : 2016D 48 yang disahkan pada tanggal, 11 Agustus 2018 adalah wujud itikat jahatbagi Tergugat;4.
      Bahwa kelahiran CLARISSA GRACE YULIANTI telah diterbitkanORIGINAL CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH, State File Number2015004331 dan Kutipan Surat Tanda Kelahiran No. 39343 / KL/ IV / 2016tanggal 25 April 2016 di Konsulat Jenderal Republik Indonesia Chicago,Amerika Serikat dan telah tercatat dalam Tanda Bukti Laporan KelahiranNo. 474.1 / 17 / CS / 2019 tanggal 22 Maret 2019 yang diterbitkan olehDinas kependudukan dan Pencatatan Sipil Kota Semarang ;5.
Putus : 09-06-2016 — Upload : 10-11-2016
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 437/B/PK/PJK/2016
Tanggal 9 Juni 2016 — DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK vs. PT. DETPAK INDONESIA,
5941 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • Putusan Nomor 437/B/PK/PJK/2016Selanjutnya ketentuan Pasal 7 ayat (1) Tax Treaty tersebut menegaskan:The profits of an enterprise of a contracting state shall be taxable only inthat state unless the enterprise carries on business in the other contractingstate through a permanent establishment situated therein.
    Putusan Nomor 437/B/PK/PJK/2016termasuk jasa jasa konsultan oleh suatu perusahaan melalui seorangkaryawan atau pegawai lainnya dimana kegiatan itu berlangsung(untuk proyek yang sama atau yang berhubungan), untuk suatu masaatau masamasa yang berjumlah lebih dari 90 hari dalam 12 bulan;Selanjutnya ketentuan Pasal 7 ayat (1) Tax Treaty tersebutmenegaskan:The profits of an enterpnse of a contracting state shall be taxableonly in that state unless the enterprise carries on business in the othercontracting
    state through a permanent establishment situated therein.If the enterprise carries on business as aforesaid, the profits of theenterprise may be taxed in the other state but only so much of themas Is attributable to thatpermanent establishment,Atau:Laba suatu perusahaan dari suatu negara hanya akan dikenakanpajak di negara itu, kecuali perusahaan tersebut menjalankan usahamelalui suatu pendirian tetap di negara lainnya;Bahwa karena jasa manajemen tersebut tidak dilakukan di Indonesiatetapi dilakukan
    The reliefs provided in theArticle apply so long as the State of which the paying companyis a resident taxes such benefits as dividends. It is immaterialwhether any such benefits are paid out of current profits madeby the company or are derived, for example, from reserves, i.e.profits of previous financial years.
    shall betaxable only in that state unless the enterprise carries onbusiness in the other contracting state through a permanentestablishment situated therein.
Putus : 19-11-2014 — Upload : 01-10-2015
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 646/B/PK/PJK/2014
Tanggal 19 Nopember 2014 — DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK VS PT. WIRAKARYA SAKTI
8645 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • Interest arising in one of the two States and paid to a resident of theother State may be taxed in that other State.2. However, such interest may also be taxed in the State in which it arisesand according to the laws of that State, but if the Beneficial Owner of theinterest is a resident of the other State, the tax so charged shall notexceed 10 per cent of the gross amount of the interest.3.
    Notwthstanding the provisions of paragraph 2, interest ansing in one ofthe two States shall be taxable only in the other State to the extent thatsuch interest is derived by:(i) the Government of the other State, including political subdivisionsand local authorities thereof; or(ii) the Central Bank of the other State; or(ili) a financial institution owned or controlled by the Government of theother State, including political subdivisions and local authoritiesthereof; or(iv) any resident of the other
    State wth respect to debtclaimsguaranteed or insured by the Government of the other Stateincluding political subdivisions and local authorities thereof, theCentral Bank of the other State or any financial institution owned orcontrolled by that Government.4.
    Commentary on Article 11 Paragraph 9..the State of source is not obliged to give up taxing rights overinterest income merely because that income wasimmediatelyreceived by a resident of a State wth which the Stateof source had concluded a convention.
    Commentary on Article 11 Paragraph 10bese It would be equally inconsistent wth the object and purposeof the Convention for the State of source to grant relief orexemption where a resident of a Contracting State, otherwsethan through an agency or nominee relationship, simply acts as aconduit for another person who in fact receives the benefit of theincome concerned.
Register : 12-10-2012 — Putus : 12-02-2014 — Upload : 28-08-2014
Putusan PENGADILAN PAJAK Nomor Put-50424/PP/M.VIIIB/13/2014
Tanggal 12 Februari 2014 — Pemohon Banding dan Terbanding
20354
  • Ketentuanyang berlaku terkait laba usaha dan BUT adalah sebagai berikut :bahwa berdasarkan Article 7.1 P3B Indonesia Inggris diatur bahwa :The profits of an enterprise of a Contracting State shall be taxable only in that State unless theenterprise carries on business in the other Contracting State through a permanent establishment situatedtherein.
    If the enterprise carries on business as aforesaid, the profits of the enterprise may be taxed inthe other State but only so much of them as is directly or indirectly attributable to that permanentestablishment;bahwa berdasarkan Article 5.3 P3B Indonesia Inggris diatur bahwa :The term "permanent establishment" likewise includes:(a) a building site, a construction, assembly or installation project or supervisory activities inconnection therewith, but only where such site, project or activities continue
    for a period of morethan 183 days;(b) the furnishing of services, including consultancy services, by an enterprise through employees orother personnel engaged by the enterprise for such purpose, but only where activities of that naturecontinue (for the same or connected project) within the Contracting State for a period or periodsaggregating more than 91 days within any continuous period of twelve months;bahwa berdasarkan Paragraph 42.11 Commentary on Article 5 OECD Model Tax Convention on Incomeand
    on Capital July 2010 diatur bahwa :The taxation of service42.11 The combined effect of this Article and Article 7 is that the profits from services performed in theterritory of a Contracting State by an enterprise of the other Contracting State are not taxable in thefirstmentioned State if they are not attributable to a permanent establishment situated therein (as longas they are not covered by other Articles of the Convention that would allow such taxation);bahwa berdasarkan ketentuan tersebut