Ditemukan 2114 data

Urut Berdasarkan
 
Register : 10-04-2014 — Putus : 30-06-2014 — Upload : 22-04-2015
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 219 B/PK/PJK/2014
Tanggal 30 Juni 2014 — DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK VS PT. WIRAKARYA SAKTI;
3922 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • 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 not exceed10 per cent of the gross amountof the interest.3.
    Commentary on Article 11 Paragraph 9..the State of source is not obliged to give up taxing rights overinterest income merely because that income was immediatelyreceivedby a resident of a State wth which the State of source had concludeda convention.
    Forthese reasons, the report from the Committee on Fiscal Affairs entitled"Double Taxation Conventions and the Use of Conduit Companies"concludes that a conduit company cannot normally be regarded as theBeneficial Owner if; though the formal owner, it has, as a practicalmatter, very narrow powers which render it, in relation to the incomeconcerned, a mere fiduciary or administrator acting on account of theinterested parties.Halaman 18 dari 36 halaman Putusan Nomor 219/B/PK/PJK/20148. 2.8.3.c.
Register : 14-12-2009 — Putus : 30-11-2010 — Upload : 18-07-2014
Putusan PN JAKARTA SELATAN Nomor 1516/Pdt.G/2009/PN.Jkt.Sel.
Tanggal 30 Nopember 2010 —
200122
  • Company (PT.NNT) adalah atas nama PT PukuafuIndah :Point 4.2 (Bukti P31)The loan money will bear interest at a rate per annum of 2 % (twopercent) above the Singapore InterBank Offer Rate from time to time forone hundred and eighty (180) days Eurodollars, which inter est will becalculated with quarterly rests, and from the time for calculation shall beand be deemed to have been added to and accumulated with theoutstanding balance of the loan money and shall itself bear interestaccordingly ;Terjemahan
    Put.No.1516/Pdt.G/2009/PN.Jkt.Sel.Indah will be jointly and severally liable for the repayment of the loanmoney and payment of Interest which will be affected by Instalments,cash for fall due at the time of payment of any dividend which becomespayable by the P.T. Company to Indah, an to equal the whole of suchdividend.
    Company to payNewmont the whole of each dividend to which Indah is estitled ;Terjemahan :PT Pukuafu Indah akan memberikan perintah yang tidak dapat ditarikkembali kepada PT.
    Company (PT.NNT) untuk membayar Newmontseluruh dividen yang menjadi hak PT Pukuafu Indah ;Point 4.5 (Bukti P34)To secure repayment of the loan money and payment of Interest asaforesaid in the Joint Venture, or a mortgage over all shares In the P.T.Company which it holds at the time of the first application for money, orwhich it subsequently acquires, and Indah will charge all dividends fromP.T.
    Company to which it is, or may subsequently become, entitle withrepayment of the loan money an payment of interest as provided toNewmont accordingly. Indah shall assign such dividends to Newmontaccotdingly.
Putus : 02-09-2015 — Upload : 10-05-2016
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 64 PK/Pdt.Sus-Arbt/2015
Tanggal 2 September 2015 — PT GLOBAL MEDIACOM Tbk. (“MCOM”), VS KT CORPORATION
638449 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • Claimant the sum of US$ 731,642 forlegal and other costs;It orders the Respondent to pay to the Claimant the sum of US$ 238,000 asthe costs of the arbitration including the Tribunals fee and expense and theICC administrative expenses;The Tribunal hereby authorize and grants power of attorney to each of theParties hereto and any Indonesian counsel appointed by either (any) ofthem, to apply for and undertake registration of this Award with the DistrictCourt of Central Jakarta, or any other court in which
    Hal ini sebagaimana dinyatakan dalamShareholder Agreement tanggal 9 Juni 2006 (bukti P2), sebagai berikut:"The company (baca: Mobile 8) intends to conduct Initial Public Offering(as defined below) which will be conducted prior to Bimantara LimitedOffering (as defined below), that will affect the changes of the status ofthe Company to become a public company;Terjemahan adalah:"Perseroan (baca: Mobile 8) bermaksud untuk melakukan PenawaranUmum Perdana (sebagaimana yang didefinisikan dibawah) dimana
    The award has not yet become binding on the parties, or has been setaside or suspended by a competent authority of the country in which, orunder the law of which, that award was made;Adapun terjemahan tersumpahnya menyatakan sebagai berikut (bukti P4.b):Pengakuan dan pelaksanaan keputusan dapat ditolak, atas permohonanpihak terhadap mana putusan itu diterapkan, hanya jika pihak ituHal. 24 dari 29 hal. Put.
Putus : 18-01-2016 — Upload : 17-06-2016
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 1059/C/PK/PJK/2015
Tanggal 18 Januari 2016 —
9349 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • Putusan Nomor 1059/C/PK/PJK/2015(a) that there are no restrictions as to the disposition or use of the goods by thebuyer other than restriction which:(i) are imposed or required by law or by the public authorithies in thecountry of importation;(ii) limit the geographical area in which the goods may be resokd; or(iii) do not substantially affect the value of the goods."
    As it appears in the Interpretative Notes to Article 8.1 (c),the term right to reproduce would seem to refer not only tothe physical reproduction of the imported goods (e.g., asample article is imported and a mould is produced by theimporter which is used to manufacture exact copies of theoriginal imported article) but also to the right to reproducean invention, creation, thought or idea incorporated in theimported goods.
    Given the unique situation with regard to data orinstructions (software) recorded on carrier media for dataprocessing equipment, and that some Parties have soughta different approach, it would also be consistent with theAgreement for those Parties which wish to do so to adoptthe following practice:In determining the Customs value of imported carrier mediabearing data or instructions, only the cost or value of thecarrier medium itself shall be taken into account.
Register : 20-12-2011 — Putus : 28-12-2012 — Upload : 21-12-2013
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 806 B/PK/PJK/2011
Tanggal 28 Desember 2012 — DIRJEN PAJAK VS PT. LEIGHTON CONTRACTORS INDONESIA;
5743 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • The provisions of paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article shall not apply if thebeneficial owner of the royalties, being a resident of a Contracting State,carries on business in the other Contracting State in which the royaltiesarise, through a permanent establishment situated therein, or performs inthat other State independent personal services from a fixed base situatedtherein, and the right or property in respect of which the royalties are paidis effectively connected wth such permanent establishment
    The provisions of paragraph 2 shall not apply if the person beneficiallyentitled to the royalties, being a resident of one of the Contracting States,carries on business in the other Contracting State, in which the royaltiesarise, through a permanent establishment situated in that other State, orperforms in that other State independent personal services from a fixedbase situated in that other State, and the property or right in respect ofwhich the royalties are paid is effectively connected with that
Putus : 01-08-2013 — Upload : 18-12-2014
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 96 B/PK/PJK/2012
Tanggal 1 Agustus 2013 — DIRJEN PAJAK vs. PT. KENCANA INTERNUSA ARTHA FINANCE d/h PT. PRIMUS FINANCIAL SERVICES
3926 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • However, such royalties may also be taxed in the ContractingState in which they arise, and according to the laws of thatState, but if the recipient is the beneficial omer of the royaltiesthe tax so charged shall not exceed 15 percent of the grossHalaman 13 dari 26 halaman. Putusan Nomor 96/B/PK/PJK/2012amount of the royalties. The competent authorities of theContracting States shall by mutual agreement settle the mode ofapplication of this limitation;4.
    Those royalties may be taxed in the Contracting State in whichthey arise, and according to the law of that State, but the tax socharged shall not exceed:(a) in the case of royalties described in subparagraphs 3(b) and(c), and to the extent to which they relate to those royalties,in subparagraphs 3(d) and (f) 10%;3.
    The term royalties in this Article means payments, whetherperiodical or not, and however described or computed, to theextent to which they are made as consideration for:(6b) the use, or the right to use, any industrial, commercial orscientific equipment; or(c) the supply of scientific, technical, industrial or commercialknoweage or information; or(d) the supply of any assistance that is ancillary and subsidiaryto, and is Vurnished as a means of enabling the initialHalaman 14 dari 26 halaman.
Putus : 31-08-2015 — Upload : 28-03-2018
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 601 K/Pdt/2015
Tanggal 31 Agustus 2015 — NINE AM Ltd. VS PT. BANGUN KARYA PRATAMA LESTARI
13061435 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • REPRESENTATION AND WARRANTIESThe Borrower has represents and warrants to Lender that:(b)(d)The Borrower (i) is not in violation of its Articles ofAssociation, (ii) is not in default in any materialrespect which such would affect the performance bythe Borrower of its obligations under this Agreement,and no event has occurred which, with notice orlapse of time or both, would constitute such a defaultin the due performance or observance of any term,covenant or condition contained in any otheragreement
    , contract or instrument to which it is aparty or by which it is bound or to which any of itsproperty or assets is subject, (iii) has not violated inany material respect any law, ordinance,governmental rule, regulation or court decree towhich it or its property may be subject, and (iv) hasnot failed to obtain and maintain in full force andeffect any material license, permit, certificate or otherapproval or authorization necessary to the conduct ofits business.The execution, delivery and performance
    of thisAgreement by the Borrower will not conflict with orresult in a breach or violation of any of the terms orprovisions of, or constitute a default under anyagreement, contract or instrument to which theBorrower is a party or by which the Borrower isbound or to which any of the property or assets of theBorrower is subject, nor will such actions result inHal. 48 dari 74 hal.
Register : 03-11-2014 — Putus : 11-02-2015 — Upload : 31-03-2016
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 1015 B/PK/PJK/2014
Tanggal 11 Februari 2015 — PT. AMERO MITRA FILM vs DIREKTUR JENDERAL BEA DAN CUKAI;
98162 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • ;provided:(a) that there are no restrictions as to the disposition or use of the goods bythe buyer other than restriction which:(i) are imposed or reguired by law or by the public authorithies in thecountry of importation;(ii) limit the geographical area in which the goods may be resold; or(iii) do not substantially affect the value of the goods.Terjemahannya adalah sebagai berikut:"Nilai pabean dari barang impor adalah nilai transaksi,...., sepanjang:(a) Tidak ada pembatasan atas pemanfaatan atau
    As it appears in the Interpretative Notes to Article 8.1 (c), the termright to reproduce would seem to refer not only to the physicalreproduction of the imported goods (e.g., a sample article is importedand a mould is produced by the importer which is used tomanufacture exact copies of the original imported article) but also tothe right to reproduce an invention, creation, thought or ideaincorporated in the imported goods.
    It would also refer to originals and copies of scientific works (such asthe importation of a new strain of bacterium which will be reproducedinto a form necessary for the production of a vaccine), originals ofliterary works (such as an importation of a manuscript for the purposeof reproduction into a book, models (importation of a scaled downmodel of a new type of automobile to be reproduced into otheridentical models), prototypes (a prototype of a new toy which will bereproduced into exact copies
    of the new toy) and animal or plantspecies (a genetically altered insect which will be reproduced tocombat the spread of the original species).Halaman 52 dari 63 halaman Putusan Nomor 1015/B/PK/PJK/2014" Bahwa berdasarkan commentary tersebut di atas, dapat diketahui bahwahak untuk mereproduksi (night to reproduce) tidak hanya terkait denganreproduksi secara fisik, namun juga reproduksi suatu hak cipta (creation).Lebih lanjut, dalam salah satu contoh yang disebutkan dalamcommentary di atas, dijelaskan
    Given the unique situation with regard to data or instructions (software)recorded on carrier media for data processing equipment, and thatsome Parties have sought a different approach, it would also beconsistent with the Agreement for those Parties which wish to do so toadopt the following practice:In determining the Customs value of imported carrier media bearing dataor instructions, only the cost or value of the carrier medium itself shall betaken into account.
Register : 23-09-2013 — Putus : 04-02-2014 — Upload : 18-03-2014
Putusan PN BATAM Nomor 176/Pdt.G/2013/PN.BTM
Tanggal 4 Februari 2014 —
4625
  • Bahwa pada Perjanjian Kerjasama tertanggal 19 Januari 2011 tersebutdengan jelas terdapat Klausula Arbitrase ;Bahwa pada butir 15 dari Perjanjian Kerjasama tertanggal 19 Januari2011 aquo dengan tegas disebutkan sebagai berikut : Any disputearising out of or relating to this agreement, which has not beenresolved by negotiations within thirty (30) days from receipt by aparty of a notice of dispute from the other party, shall be settledexclusivey by arbitration before a panel of three (3) arbitrators
    The venue of any arbitrationbrougt pursuant to this Agreement shall be in Batam, and thelanguage, in which the arbitration shall be conducted, including allwritings relating there to, shall be in Indonesia and Chinese.Yang terjemahan resminya sebagai berikut :Apabila musyawarah tidak berhasil, maka suatu panel arbitrase yangterdiri dari 3 orang yang sesuai dengan peraturan arbitrase KamarDagang Internasional harus dibentuk dalam 30 hari sejak tanggaldimana salah satu pihak menyampaikan pemberitahuan
Putus : 04-12-2017 — Upload : 28-08-2018
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 755 PK/Pdt/2017
Tanggal 4 Desember 2017 — JENNY vs AARON PAN
8447 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • Immigration Deposit of Mr lewan Harto which is Nomor 394and dated 26 August 1991 di EDB Singapura sebesarSingapura $ 350,000.00 (tiga ratus limapuluh ribu dollarSingapura atau senilai Rp3.500.000.000,00):7. Bahwa Tergugat (Aaron Pan) berdasarkan bukti otentik yaituSurat Dinas Kependudukan dan Pencatatan Sipil DKI ProvinsiJakarta, Nomor 2628/1.755.15, tertanggal 6 Maret 2013, perihalInformasi Keabsahan Nama atas nama Aaron Pan menyebutkan1.
    Immigration Deposit of Mr lewan Harto which is No 394 anddated 26 August 1991 di EDB Singapura sebesar Singapura$350,000.00 (tiga ratus lima puluh ribu dollar Singapura);20.
    (tigaratus empat belas koma tiga meter pesegi) terletak dikotaShanghai Negara Republik Rakyat Tiongkok;Immigration Deposit of Mr lewan Harto which is No 394 anddated26 August 1991 di EDB Singapura sebesar Singapura$350.000 ,00(tiga ratus lima puluh ribu dollar Singapura);Halaman 13 dari 49 Hal. Put. Nomor 755 PK/Pdt/20179.
    Immigration Deposit of Mr lewan Harto which is No 394 and dated26 August 1991 di EOB Singapura sebesar Singapura $ 350.00 (tigaratus lima puluh ribu dollar Singapura) atau sanilai Rp3.500.000.000, 00;7.
    Immigration Deposit of Mr lewan Harto which is No 394 and dated26 August 1991 di EDB Smgapura sebesar Singapura $ 350.000(tigaratus lima puluh ribu dollar Singapura):32.
Register : 25-06-2019 — Putus : 27-06-2019 — Upload : 03-07-2019
Putusan PN BATAM Nomor 830/Pdt.P/2019/PN Btm
Tanggal 27 Juni 2019 — Pemohon:
JOHANY.Y
1611
  • Fotocopy To All To Whom These Presents Shall Come, 25" day of May2019, Which Attest LEE MIN SEN, Notary Public Singapore, diberi tandaP6;Halaman 2 dari 6 Penetapan Nomor : 830 / PDT. P/ 2019/ PN Btm7. Fotocopy terjemahan Surat Keterangan Pernyataan yang di Saksikan dandibuat Oleh Notaris LEE MIN SEN, tanggal 25 Mei 2019, diberi tanda P6;8.
Putus : 30-06-2015 — Upload : 02-12-2015
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 307/B/PK/PJK/2015
Tanggal 30 Juni 2015 — DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK VS PT. WIRAKARYA SAKTI
5945 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • 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.
    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 Stateof source had concluded a convention.
    For these reasons, the report from theCommittee on Fiscal Affairs entitled "Double TaxationConventions and the Use of Conduit Companies" concludes thata conduit company cannot normally be regarded as the BeneficialOwner if; though the formal owner, it has, as a practical matter,very narrow powers which render it, in relation to the incomeconcerned, a mere fiduciary or administrator acting on account ofthe interested parties.c.
    Yahya HarahapSH, Hukum Acara Perdata, Gugatan, Persidangan, Penyitaan, Pembuktiandan Putusan Pengadilan, Penerbit Sinar Grafika, hal. 830);Bahwa dalam Yurisprudensi, putusan yang diambil mengandungpertimbangan yang mendasar yaitu ratio decidendi atau basic reason,berupa prinsip hukum yang dijadikan dasar putusan yang diambil (theprinciple of law which the decision is based), dan putusan yang dijatuhkanmerupakan kasus yang berhubungan dengan perkembangan hukum (lawdevelopment), sehingga pada hakekatnya
Register : 04-03-2013 — Putus : 08-04-2014 — Upload : 30-03-2015
Putusan PENGADILAN PAJAK Nomor PUT.51804/PP/M.VIIA/19/2014
Tanggal 8 April 2014 — Pemohon Banding dan Terbanding
11322
  • itu;Pos 64.01 tidak mempertimbangkan apakah bagian upper berlubang atau tidak,asalkan Alas Kaki dimaksud memenuhi kriteria dimaksud butir 7.1 di atas, harusdiklasifikasi pada Pos 64.01.bahwa sesuai dengan struktur pos tarif 64.01 di dalam Buku Tarif KepabeananIndonesia Tahun 2012, sebagai berikut :Alas kaki tahan air dengan sol luar dan Waterproof footwear with outer solesbagian atas dari karet atau dari plastik, and uppers of rubber or of Plastics, thebagian atasnya tidak dipasang pada uppers of which
Register : 14-08-2012 — Putus : 18-09-2014 — Upload : 19-01-2015
Putusan PN JAKARTA PUSAT Nomor 50/PATEN/2012/PN.NIAGA/JKT.PST
Tanggal 18 September 2014 — PT. CINTAS SENTUL RAYA >< 1.) PT. TOILON INDONESIA ; 2.) PEMERINTAH REPUBLIK INDONESIA cq. KEMENTERIAN HUKUM & HAK ASASI MANUSIA REPUBLIK INDONESIA cq. DIREKTORAT JENDERAL HAK KEKAYAAN INTELEKTUAL cq DIREKTORAT PATEN
14381698
  • Mengutip Abstrakdari paten tersebut: Purpose: a heat insulator manufacturing system and methodare provided to obtain highly reflection or low radiation which is a inherentcharacteristic of aluminum sheet and improve thermal isolation.
    Constitution: Aheat insulator manufacturing system (100) comprises the feeder (102) forsupplying the crosslinking polyethylene foam sheet of roll type, the frame (105)having the winder (104) for reeling the heat reflective thermal material (103), thecutting portion (110) for forming a plurality of cut groves on the cxrosslinkingpolyethy6lene foam sheet, the expansion portion (130) in which the cut groove istranbsformed into the throughhole, the cooling portion (150) for keeping thethroughhole and
Putus : 30-06-2015 — Upload : 02-12-2015
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 306/B/PK/PJK/2015
Tanggal 30 Juni 2015 — DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK VS PT. WIRAKARYA SAKTI
8660 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • 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 ofHalaman 16 dari 37 halaman. Putusan Nomor 306/B/PK/PJK/2015the interest is a resident of the other State, the tax so charged shall notexceed 10 per cent of the gross amount of the interest.3.
    Putusan Nomor 306/B/PK/PJK/20158. 2.received by a resident of a State with which the State of sourcehad concluded a convention. The term "Beneficial Owner " is notused in a narrow technical sense, rather, it should be understoodin its context and in light of the object and purposes of theConvention, including avoiding double taxation and the preventionof fiscal evasion and avoidance ;.
    For these reasons, the report from theCommittee on Fiscal Affairs entitled "Double Taxation Conventionsand the Use of Conduit Companies" concludes that a conduitcompany cannot normally be regarded as the Beneficial Owner if;though the formal owner, it has, as a practical matter, very narrowpowers which render it, in relation to the income concerned, amere fiduciary or administrator acting on account of the interestedparties..
    Putusan Nomor 306/B/PK/PJK/2015SH, Hukum Acara Perdata, Gugatan, Persidangan, Penyitaan, Pembuktiandan Putusan Pengadilan, Penerbit Sinar Grafika, hal. 830);Bahwa dalam /Yurisprudensi, putusan yang diambil mengandungpertimbangan yang mendasar yaitu ratio decidendi atau basic reason,berupa prinsip hukum yang dijadikan dasar putusan yang diambil (theprinciple of law which the decision is based), dan putusan yang dijatuhkanmerupakan kasus yang berhubungan dengan perkembangan hukum (/awdevelopment),
Register : 01-08-2016 — Putus : 26-10-2016 — Upload : 05-12-2016
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 1083 B/PK/PJK/2016
Tanggal 26 Oktober 2016 — PT. LAFARGE CEMENT INDONESIA VS DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK;
6439 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • Pasal 14 ayat (2): Gains from the alienation of movable property forming partof the business property of a permanent establishment which an enterpriseof a Contracting State has in the other Contracting State, including suchgains from the alienation of such a permanent establishment (alone or withthe whole enterprise), may be taxed in that other State.
    Pasal 14 ayat (4): Gains from the alienation of any property other than thatreferred to in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3, shall be taxable only in the ContractingState of which the alienator is a resident.Bahwa berdasarkan penjelasan tersebut di atas, maka hak pemajakan ataspenjualan saham PT Lafarge Cement Indonesia yang dilakukan oleh CementiaHolding AG tidak berada di Indonesia dan karenanya atas hal itu tidak terutangPPh Pasal 26;Bahwa di samping itu, Penggugat tidak setuju dengan dasar hukum penolakanpihak
    Selanjutnya, Persetujuan Penghindaran Pajak Berganda (P3B) / TaxTreaty antara Pemerintan Republik Indonesia dan PemerintahKonfederasi Swiss mengatur bahwa:Pasal 14 ayat (1)Gains derived by a resident of a Contracting State from the alienation ofimmovable property referred to in Article 6 and situated in the otherContracting State may be taxed in that other State.Pasal 14 ayat (2)Gains from the alienation of movable property forming part of thebusiness property of a permanent establishment which an
    Thus whilst it is acceptable to reduce tax liability by legitimatetax planning, governments make a distinction between this form of taxplanning and forms of tax minimization which clearly go against theintent of the legislator.
    Taxpayers are also entitled to a reasonablemeasure of assistance from the tax authorities so that they receive allthe reliefs and deductions to which they are entitled.Sesuai dengan kutipan OECD di atas, maka Wajib Pajak dalam hal iniselaku Pemohon Peninjauan Kembali (Semula Penggugat) berhakuntuk mengajukan Gugatan kepada Pengadilan Pajak dalam rangkamenempuh semua upaya hukum yang diakibatkan karena PemohonPeninjauan Kembali (Ssemula Penggugat) tidak setuju atas hasilkeputusan yang diterbitkan
Putus : 30-11-2015 — Upload : 10-03-2016
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 686/B/PK/PJK/2015
Tanggal 30 Nopember 2015 — DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK vs. PT. LINCOLN ELECTRIC INDONESIA
5940 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • 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.
    Normally, distributions by acompany which have the effect of reducing the membershiprights, for instance, payments constituting a reimbursement ofcapital in any form whatever, are not regarded as dividends;Paragraf 29:The benefits to which a holding in a company confer entitlementare, aS a general rule, available solely to the shareholdersthemselves;Should, however, certain of such benefits be made available topersons who are not shareholders within the meaning ofcompany law, they may constitute
    company whichhave the effect of reducing the membership rights, forinstance, payments constituting a reimbursement of capitalin any form whatever, are not regarded as dividends;(Suatu pembayaran disebut sebagai ddividen termasuktidak hanya distribusi laba yang diputuskan dalam RapatUmum Pemegang Saham, tetapi juga manfaat/keuntunganlain baik berupa uang atau bernilai uang, misalnyapembagian saham bonus, bonus,keuntungan dari likuidasidan distribusi laba secara terselubung);Paragraf 29:The benefits to which
    whichhave the effect of reducing the membership rights, forinstance, payments constituting a reimbursement of capitalin any form whatever, are not regarded as dividends;(Suatu pembayaran disebut sebagai ddividen termasuktidak hanya distribusi laba yang diputuskan dalam RapatUmum Pemegang Saham, tetapi juga manfaat/keuntunganlain baik berupa uang atau bernilai uang, misalnyapembagian saham bonus, bonus, keuntungan dari likuidasidan distribusi laba secara terselubung);Paragraf 29:The benefits to which
Putus : 20-11-2017 — Upload : 12-03-2018
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 2100 B/PK/PJK/2017
Tanggal 20 Nopember 2017 — DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK VS PT. ANEKA INTIPERSADA
3714 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • Prinsip ini dapat dianggapsebagai dasar pemikiran untuk prinsip keadilan horisontal dankeadilan vertical);Bahwa terkait dengan Keadilan Horizontal (Horizontal Equity)pada halaman 221 disebutkan:A variant of principle of individual equity which holds thatsimilarly situated taxpayers should receive similar taxtreatment",(varian dari prinsip keadilan individual yaitu bahwa wajib pajakyang berada pada situasi yang sama harus menerima perlakuanpajak yang sama);Bahwa sedang untuk Keadilan Vertikal (Vertical
    Equity) padahalaman 472 menyebutkan:A variant of individual equity, which holds that differentlysituated taxpayers should be treated differently;(varian dari keadilan individual yaitu bahwa wajib pajak yangberada pada situasi yang berbeda harus diperlakukanberbeda);Bahwa Musgrave dalam Horizontal Equity, Once More(Richard A.
    This principle of equality, or horizontal equity, isfundamental to ihe abilitytopay approach, which requires equaltaxation of people with equal ability and unequal taxation ofpeople with unequal ability. Beyond this, the principle of equalityis accepted by many who do not lay much siore in the abilitytopay approach. Indeed, has been suggested that the rule ofhorizontal equity is valid, even though little can be said aboutHalaman 16 dari 68 halaman.
    Without a scheme ofvertical equity, the requirement of horizontal equity at bestbecomes a safeguard against capricious discrimination a safeguard which might be provided equally well by arequirement that taxes be distributed at random. To mean morethan this, the principle of horizonthal equity must be seenagainst the backdrop of an explicit view of vertical equity,(Persyaratan adanya keadilan horisontal dan vertikal adalah duasisi yang berbeda dari koin yang sama.
    are imposed initially on theindividual or household that is meant to bear the burden;Indirect taxes are taxes which are imposed at some other pointin the system but are meant to be shifted to whomever issupposed to be the final bearer of the burden;Halaman 19 dari 68 halaman.
Putus : 10-06-2015 — Upload : 11-03-2016
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 214/B/PK/PJK/2015
Tanggal 10 Juni 2015 — DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK vs PT. PRITHO
8666 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • data pembanding / transaksi PT Z ke PT A/Halaman 18 dari 37 halaman Putusan Nomor 214/B/PK/PJK/2015franko pabrik) ditambahkan dengan nilai beda kondisiRp.100.000,00 yaitu biaya pengangkutan dan asuransi) samadengan Rp.2.100.000,00.Referensi lain mengenai definisi wajar (arms length principle) dapatditemukan pada OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines, pada Paragraf 1.6yang berbunyi :where conditions are made or imposed between the two (associated)enterprises in their commercial or financial relations which
    differ fromthose which would be made between independent enterprises, then anyprofits which would, but for those conditions, have accrued to one of theenterprises, but, by reason of those conditions, have no so accrued,may be included in the profits of that enterprise and taxed accordinglyJika suatu kondisi yang terjadi antara pihak yang terafiliasi berbedadengan kondisi yang terjadi antara pihakpinak yang independen,kemudian suatu laba yang seharusnya dilaporkan di salah satuperusahaan tertentu
    Yahya Harahap SH, Hukum Acara Perdata,Gugatan, Persidangan, Penyitaan, Pembuktian dan Putusan Pengadilan,Penerbit Sinar Grafika, hal. 830).Halaman 31 dari 37 halaman Putusan Nomor 214/B/PK/PJK/2015Bahwa dalam Yurisprudensi, putusan yang diambil mengandung pertimbanganyang mendasar yaitu ratio decidendi atau basic reason, berupa prinsip hukumyang dijadikan dasar putusan yang diambil (the principle of law which thedecision is based), dan putusan yang dijatunkan merupakan kasus yangberhubungan dengan
Register : 05-07-2013 — Putus : 03-06-2014 — Upload : 26-06-2015
Putusan PENGADILAN PAJAK Nomor Put-52895/PP/M.VIIA/19/2014
Tanggal 3 Juni 2014 — Pemohon Banding dan Terbanding
12123
  • itu;Pos 64.01 tidak mempertimbangkan apakah bagian upper berlubang atau tidak,asalkan Alas Kaki dimaksud memenuhi kriteria dimaksud butir 7.1 di atas, harusdiklasifikasi pada Pos 64.01.bahwa sesuai dengan struktur pos tarif 64.01 di dalam Buku Tarif KepabeananIndonesia Tahun 2012, sebagai berikut :Alas kaki tahan air dengan sol luar dan Waterproof footwear with outer solesbagian atas dari karet atau dari plastik, and uppers of rubber or of plastics, thebagian atasnya tidak dipasang pada uppers of which