Ditemukan 345 data

Urut Berdasarkan
 
Register : 26-08-2016 — Putus : 22-11-2016 — Upload : 23-03-2017
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 385 K/TUN/2016
Tanggal 22 Nopember 2016 — BUPATI TANGERANG VS H. SAADULLOH SYROCH;
11777 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • inducements pressures, threats,or interference, directly or indirectly, from any quarter or for any reasonincluding those arising from : a conflict of interest, nepotism, favountism tofriends, or a particular association or institution, consideration of postretirement placements, improper socialisation with members of the legalprofession, the executive, or the legislature, socialisation with litigants, orprospective litigants, predetermination of an issue involved in the litigationprejudice, having regard
Putus : 25-06-2015 — Upload : 08-07-2015
Putusan PN SIDOARJO Nomor 103/ Pid. B/ 2015/ PN. Sda
Tanggal 25 Juni 2015 — DEDY YOSEP
200154
  • SSI, diantaranya saksi Nono Ach Dewanto dansaksi Anton Gading yang isi pesan email tersebut : Dear pak Anton, kamimenawarkan fuso yang akan masuk ke Surabaya besok dan bisa muat diSSI senin paling lambat, adapun harga yang kami ajukan adalah sebagaiberikut : tarif fuso max 17 ton Rp. 26 Jt per Rit, tarif tronton Max 30 TonRp. 43 Jt Per Rit, Add Cost khusus untuk Tronton 3,5 Jt, kami tunggu SPK/ PO dari Bapak Thx, regard Dedy Yosep; Bahwa pada tanggal 21 Oktober 2013 saksi Nono Achdiat Dewanto telahmenelphone
    SSI, diantaranyasaksi Nono Achdiat Dewanto dan saksi Anton Gading yang isi pesan emailtersebut "Dear pak Anton, kami menawarkan FUSO yang akan masuk keSurabaya besok dan bisa muat di SSI Senin paling lambat, adapun harga yangkami ajukan adalah sebagai berikut : tarif FUSO max 17 ton Rp. 26 Jt per Rit,tarif tronton Max 30 Ton Rp. 43 Jt per Rit, Add Cost khusus untuk Tronton 3,5Jt, kami tunggu SPK/ PO dari Bapak Thx, regard Dedy Yosep"; Bahwa pada tanggal 21 Oktober 2013 saksi Nono Achdiat Dewanto
Putus : 15-08-2017 — Upload : 14-11-2017
Putusan PN SURABAYA Nomor 741/Pdt.G/2016/PN.Sby
Tanggal 15 Agustus 2017 — PT. PERFETTI VAN MELLE INDONESIA melawan PT. INTERPACK
21342
  • .: PM0032015 tertanggal 12 Maret 2015 disebutkan bahwa :The partiesreciprocally acknowledge that any dispute that may arise with regard to the validity, interpretationand execution of the Deed will be settled by the Indonesian jurisdiction and the competent courtwill be that of Surabaya.
Register : 10-04-2014 — Putus : 30-06-2014 — Upload : 30-04-2015
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 218 B/PK/PJK/2014
Tanggal 30 Juni 2014 — DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK VS PT. WIRAKARYA SAKTI;
5638 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • Ownership is merely formal, ifthe owner is fettered in regard to both aspects either in or in factOn the other hand, recourse to the treaty is justified i.e. is notimproper if he who is entitled under the private law is five toWeld at least one of the powers referred to.
Register : 30-11-2012 — Putus : 25-03-2013 — Upload : 23-10-2014
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 768 B/PK/PJK/2012
Tanggal 25 Maret 2013 — DIRJEN PAJAK VS PT. INDAH KIAT PULP & PAPER TBK;
7734 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • Ownership is merelyformal, if the owner is fettered in regard to both aspects either in or in fact.Halaman 27 dari 40 halaman. Putusan Nomor 768/B/PK/PJK/201228On the other hand, recourse to the treaty is justified i.e. is not improper if he who is entitled under the private law is free to wield at least one of thepowers referred to.
Register : 18-09-2013 — Putus : 18-12-2013 — Upload : 27-11-2019
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 669 B/PK/PJK/2013
Tanggal 18 Desember 2013 — DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK VS PT. MURNI TIMBER;
13589 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • ., whether the capital or assets should he used ormade available for usethe second is the right to dispose of the yield.Ownership is merely formal, if the owner is fettered in regard to bothaspects either in or in fact On the other hand, recourse to the treaty isJustifiedi.e. is not improper if he who is entitled under the private law isfive to wield at least one of the powers referred to.
Putus : 27-02-2014 — Upload : 23-10-2014
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 736/B/PK/PJK/2013
Tanggal 27 Februari 2014 — DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK vs. PT. INDOSAT Tbk
374220 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • Ownershipis merely formal, if the owner is fettered in regard to both aspects either inor in fact On the other hand, recourse to the treaty is justified i.e. is notimproper if he who is entitled under the private law is five to wield at leastone of the powers referred to.
Putus : 18-05-2016 — Upload : 30-09-2016
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 26 PK/Pdt.Sus-Arbt/2016
Tanggal 18 Mei 2016 — 1. ASTRO NUSANTARA INTERNATIONAL B.V, DKK VS 1. PT AYUNDA PRIMA MITRA, DKK
15372026 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • Rule 29.1 provides that unless the parties have agreed otherwise (whichthey have not), "the tribunal shall determine in the award the apportionmentof the costs of the arbitration among the parties";16.Having regard to the fact that the Claimants have wholly or largelysucceeded at each stage of the reference, the Tribunal conclude that theRespondents should pay the whole of the costs of the arbitration;Legal costs17.
Register : 04-08-2014 — Putus : 19-11-2014 — Upload : 14-08-2015
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 649 B/PK/PJK/2014
Tanggal 19 Nopember 2014 — DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK VS PT. WIRAKARYA SAKTI
5592 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • Omership is merely formal, if the owner is fettered in regard toboth aspects either in or in fact On the other hand, recourse to thetreaty is justified i.e. is not improper if he who is entitled underthe private law is five to weld at least one of the powers referred to.Hence, the "Beneficial Owner" is he who free to decide (1) wether ornot the capital or other assets should be used or made available foruse by others or (2) on howthe yields therefrom should be used or (3)both.,8.3.
Author : Rahmad Setiawan; J. Satrio;
Cessie
709913660
  • Beberapa segi lembaga hukum cessie perlu mendapat perhatian, yaitu1. pengertian tentang cessie perlu diseragamkan agar dalam pelaksanaannya bisa  menghasilkan keputusan yang baik;2. bahwa penyerahan benda-benda tak bertubuh yang bukan berupa ... [Selengkapnya]
  • Also valid is the assignment of an undivided share in a debt andup to a certain extent (with due regard for the requirement of individualisation) theassignment of a part of a portfolio of debts.An assignment cannot be undone by a mere agreement. As is true for otherdelivery, the reestablishment of the older proprietary condition will requirethe retransfer (retro cessie), except in case of delivery subject to resolutiveconditions.C.
    Article 3:36 BW also calls for attention,however, which protects the assignee against defences which he did not need toexpect, having regard to the contents of the agreement suggested visavis him.See also art. 6:149 BW, in which it is assumed that the debitor cessus can assertclaims against the assignor for the nullification or setting aside of the agreementbetween him and the assignee (the agreement which provided the transferred debt)after the assignment.In principle, the debitor cessus is also
Putus : 19-03-2014 — Upload : 09-09-2014
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 696 B/PK/PJK/2013
Tanggal 19 Maret 2014 — DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK VS PT. INDOSAT Tbk
10683 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • Ownershipis merely formal, if the owner is fettered in regard to both aspects either inor in fact On the other hand, recourse to the treaty is justified i.e. is notimproper if he who is entitled under the private law is five to wield at leastone of the powers referred to. Hence, the "beneficial owner" is he who freeto decide (1) whether or not the capital or other assets should be used ormade available for use by others or (2) on how the yields therefrom shouldbe used or (3) both."
Putus : 25-06-2013 — Upload : 23-10-2014
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 866/B/PK/PJK/2012
Tanggal 25 Juni 2013 — DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK vs PT. PINDO DELI PULP AND PAPER MILLS,
6535 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • Ownership is merely formal, if the owner isfettered in regard to both aspects either in or in fact. On the otherhand, recourse to the treaty is justified i.e. is not improper ifhe who is entitled under the private law is free to wield at least oneof the powers referred to.
Register : 17-05-2021 — Putus : 15-07-2021 — Upload : 19-07-2021
Putusan PT JAKARTA Nomor 195/PDT/2021/PT DKI
Tanggal 15 Juli 2021 — Pembanding/Terbanding/Penggugat : PT TMF INDONESIA Diwakili Oleh : PT TMF Indonesia
Terbanding/Pembanding/Tergugat I : Vinod Kumar Chandra Kumar
Terbanding/Pembanding/Tergugat II : PT Vink Indonesia
Terbanding/Pembanding/Tergugat III : PT Magna Praxis Indonesia,
Terbanding/Pembanding/Tergugat IV : Fitriola Nadiah
Terbanding/Pembanding/Tergugat V : Gadis Aditya Siregar
Terbanding/Pembanding/Tergugat VI : Imran Karim Bachtiar S
Terbanding/Pembanding/Tergugat VII : Denny Tanuwijaya
Terbanding/Pembanding/Tergugat VIII : Jessica Budiwarman
903702
  • In this regard, there are 2 options:1) Perform accounting and tax services as part of the scope ofwork in addition to directorship services. We will be happy todiscuss scope and related fees.2) Change the contracting party to our specially createdentity (SPV) called PT Magna Praxis Indonesia yaituTergugat 3 dalam Gugatana quo to ringfence ourdirectorship risks with the current scope and fees.
Putus : 18-03-2014 — Upload : 23-10-2014
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 990/B/PK/PJK/2013
Tanggal 18 Maret 2014 — DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK VS PT. INDOSAT, TBK
271280 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • ., wether the capital or assets should be used or madeavailable for lise the second is the right to dispose ofthe yiekl.Ownership is merely formal, if the owner is fettered in regard to bothaspects either in or in fact On the other hand, recourse to the treaty isjustified i.e. is not improper if he who is entitled under the private lawis five to weld at least one of the powers referred to.
Putus : 30-10-2017 — Upload : 28-12-2017
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 1648/B/PK/PJK/2017
Tanggal 30 Oktober 2017 — DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK VS PT TAPIAN NADENGGAN
7049 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • Ownership ismerely formal, if the owner is fettered in regard to bothaspects either in or in fact. On the other hand, recourseto the treaty is justifiedi.e. is not improperif he who isentitled under the private law is free to wield at least oneof the powers referred to.
Putus : 11-10-2017 — Upload : 28-12-2017
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 584 PK/Pdt/2017
Tanggal 11 Oktober 2017 — PTASURANSIPURNAARTHANUGRAHA, DK VS PT BAHTERA MARINA PERKASA, DK
7938 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • jelasjelas mengakibatkan pertanggungan atasPolis Nomor 01.61.B.0005.01.09 menjadi batal demi hukum yang secarategas diatur dalam Alinea (2) pada halaman 2 dalam terjemahan resmipolis pertanggungan lambung kapal dengan Polis Nomor 01.61.B.0005.01.09 PT Bahtera Marina Perkasa (Termohon Pk) yang telahdiajukan Para Pemohon pada tingkat pertama di PN Jakarta Pusat (buktiT. dan Il4), berikut Para Pemohon kutip di bawah ini:If the Assured shall make any claim knowing the same to be false offraudulent, as regard
Putus : 18-01-2016 — Upload : 18-05-2016
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 1207/B/PK/PJK/2015
Tanggal 18 Januari 2016 —
7336 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • Thetransferee will generally be prepared to pay this licence feeif the benefit it reasonably expects to secure from the useof the intangibles is satisfactory having regard to otheroptions realistically available.
Register : 15-11-2017 — Putus : 18-01-2018 — Upload : 12-05-2018
Putusan PT SURABAYA Nomor 689/PDT/2017/PT SBY
Tanggal 18 Januari 2018 — MAURITIUS RADJADINATA, Swasta, alamat Jl. International Village I B.6/34 Citraland Surabaya, yang dalam hal ini diwakili oleh Kuasanya yaitu : 1. SUMARSO, SH, MH ; 2. TEGUH DWI CAHYONO, SH., MH ; 3. HERY PRASEYO, SH ; Para Advokat pada Kantor Advokat %u201CSUMARSO & PARTNERS%u201D beralamat di Jalan Joyoboyo No.27 i Surabaya, berdasarkan Surat Kuasa Khusus tanggal11 Oktober 2013, selanjutnya disebut sebagaiPEMBANDING SemulaPENGGUGAT ; MELAWAN 1. JOHANES NENO, dalam kedudukannya selaku Direktur Utama PT. GOLDEN GROBALY INDONESIA (dahulu PT. GOLDEN GLOBAL INDONESIA), beralamat di Jalan Bajawa RT.035-RW.011, Kelurahan Fatululi, Kecamatan Oebobo, Kota Kupang, Nusa Tenggara Timur, selanjutnya disebut sebagaiTERBANDING I semula TERGUGAT I.; 2. JOHANES NENO, bertempat tinggal di Jalan Bajawa RT.035-RW.011, Kelurahan Fatululi, Kecamatan Oebobo, Kota Kupang, Nusa Tenggara Timur, selanjutnya disebut sebagaiTERBANDING II semula TERGUGAT II ;
7358
  • Ada beberapa pendapat tentangPraktek VexatiousProceeding :"Vexatious litigation is legal action which is brought, regard less of itsmerits, solely to harass or subdue an adversary. It may take the form ofaprimary frivolous lawsuit or may be the repetitive, burdensome, andunwarranted filing of meritless motions in a matter which is otherwse ameritorious cause of action. Filing vexatious litigationis considered anabuse of the judicial process and may result in sanctions against the offender.
Register : 09-07-2015 — Putus : 16-02-2016 — Upload : 12-08-2016
Putusan PN JAKARTA PUSAT Nomor 132/PDT.P/2015/PN.JKT.PST.
Tanggal 16 Februari 2016 — WIHARTATI MUSLIM, Warga Negara Indonesia,Cs >< LAM TIN SING,Cs
363128
  • Ada pun isi surel Pemohon VI dapatTermohon II kutip sebagai berikut:"In this regard, if you have not already heard, the appointed Willexecutors named in the father's last Will have declined the role".Terjemahan:"Dalam hal ini, apabila anda belum mendengar, para pelaksanawasiat terakhir ayah yang ditunjuk, telah menolak penunjukkannya"6. Bahwa dalil Para Pemohon pada angka 5158 yang intinyamenunjuk Tuan Andrey U.
    Ada pun isi email Pemohon VI dapat Termohon Il kutipsebagaiberikut:"In this regard, if you have not already heard, the appointed Willexecutors named in the father's last Will have declined the role".Terjemahan:"Dalam hal ini, apabila anda belum mendengar, para pelaksanawasiat terakhir ayah yang ditunjuk, telah menolakpenunjukkannya"6.
Putus : 04-08-2015 — Upload : 10-03-2016
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 375 B/PK/PJK/2015
Tanggal 4 Agustus 2015 — PT. YASULOR INDONESIA VS DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK
272260 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • "With regard to transfer pricing of goods, technology, trademarks andservices between associated enterprises and the methodologieswhich may be applied for determining correct prices wheretransfers have been made on other than arm's length terms, theContracting States will follow the OECD principles which are set outin the OECD Transfer pricing Guidelines.
    Putusan Nomor 375/B/PK/PJK/201511.1.1.3.12commentary Pasal 9 model Persetujuan Penghindaran PajakBerganda sesuai UN Model (Bukti PK87) dinyatakan antara lain:With regard to transfer pricing of goods, technology, trademarks andservices between associated enterprises and the methodologieswhich may be applied for determining correct prices where transfershave been made on other than arms length terms, the ContractingStates will follow the OECD principles which are set out in the OECDTransfer pricing