Ditemukan 215 data

Urut Berdasarkan
 
Register : 21-05-2014 — Putus : 05-08-2014 — Upload : 30-06-2015
Putusan PN JAKARTA PUSAT Nomor 36/PDT.SUS-MEREK/2014/PN.NIAGA.JKT.PST
Tanggal 5 Agustus 2014 — CRC INDUSTRIES, INC >< FEBRIYANTO
388173
  • nnnKutipan Pasal 6 bis Konvensi Paris :The countries of the Union undertake, ex ofFicio if their legislation so permits, or at the reguest of an interestedparty, to refuse or to cancel the registration, and to prohibit the use, of a trademark which constitutes areproduction an imitation, or a translation, liable to create confusion, of a mark considered by the competentauthority of the country of registration or use to be well known in that country as being aiready the mark of aperson entiled to the benefits
Register : 18-07-2018 — Putus : 01-11-2018 — Upload : 22-05-2019
Putusan PN JAKARTA PUSAT Nomor 35/Pdt.Sus-HKI/Merek/2018/PN Niaga Jkt.Pst
Tanggal 1 Nopember 2018 — Penggugat:
CLIO COSMETICS
Tergugat:
JIMMY CHANDRA
694390
  • ayat (1)Konvensi Paris menyebutkan :"The countries of the Union undertake, ex officio if their legislationpermits, or at the request of interested party, to refuse or to cancel theregistration, and so prohibit the use of a trademark which constitutes areproduction, an imitation, or a translation, liable to create confusion of amark considered by the competent authority of the country of theregistration or use to be well known in that country as being already themark of a person entitled to the benefits
    ayat (1) Konvensi Paris menyebutkan : The countries of the unionundertake, ex officio if their legislation permits, or at the request of interestedparty, to refuse or to cancel the regislation, and so prohibit the use of atrademark which constitutes a reproduction, an amitation, or a translation, liableto create confusion of a mark considered by the competent authority of thecountry of the registration or use to be well known in that country as beingalready the mark of a person entitled to the benefits
Putus : 19-12-2016 — Upload : 31-05-2017
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 1734/B/PK/PJK/2016
Tanggal 19 Desember 2016 — DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK vs. PT. RIMBA HUTAN LESTARI
8958 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • Buku berjudul "Beneficial Ownership of Royalties in BilateralTax Treaties" yang ditulis oleh Carl P. du Toit dikutip tulisanKlaus Vogel (Klaus Vogel on Double Taxation Conventions,1997):"Treaty benefits should not be granted with a view to a formaltitle to dividends, interest, or royalties, but to the "real" title. Inother words, the dispute of "form versus substance" should bedecided in favour of "substance"... The "substance" of the rightto receive certain yields has a dual aspect.
    OECD Tax Glossary dan IBFD International Tax Glossary,A person who enjoys the real benefits of ownership, eventhough the title to the property is in another name.
    Oftenimportant in tax treaties, as a resident of a tax treaty partnermay be denied the benefits of certain reduced withholding taxrates if the beneficial owner of the dividends etc. is resident of athird country (OECD Tax Glossary);The term beneficial ownership is often used in contrast to legalownership, where ownership rights are split, the latter referringto the more formal attributes such as registration, etc. (IBFDInternational Tax Glossary);4.17.
    Dengandemikian OECD menggunakan karakterkarakter untuk menjelaskanbahwa yang tidak termasuk dalam pengertian beneficial owner secaranegatif adalah agent, nominee, mere fiduciary, administrator, danconduit company;Bahwa sedangkan menurut Klaus Vogel on Double TaxationConventions, 1997"Treaty benefits should not be granted with a view to a formal title todividends, interest, or royalties, but to the "real" title.
Register : 21-09-2015 — Putus : 23-12-2015 — Upload : 08-03-2016
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 849 B/PK/PJK/2015
Tanggal 23 Desember 2015 — DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK VS PT. CITRA SURYA KOMUNIKASI;
4022 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • Also wherethe competent authorities of the Contracting State have the power toaoolv discretionary provisions, it may be considered appropriate toinclude an additional rule that would give the competent authority ofthe source country the discretion to allow the benefits of theConvention to a resident of the other state even if the resident fail topass anv of the test described above".
Putus : 23-12-2015 — Upload : 14-09-2016
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 954/B/PK/PJK/2015
Tanggal 23 Desember 2015 — DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK vs PT SEBANGUN BUMI ANDALAS WOOD INDUSTRIES
4020 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • of that State, but if the BeneficialOwner of the interest is a resident of the other State, the tax socharged shall not exceed 10 percent of the gross amount of theinterest;Bahwa berdasarkan P3B Indonesia dan Belanda, ada dua syarat agarP3B dapat diterapkan yaitu domisili yang dibuktikan dengan Certificateof Domicile (CoD) dan syarat sebagai Beneficial Owner (BO); The Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development(OECD) mendefinisikan Beneficial Owner sebagai "A person whoenjoys the real benefits
    Often important in tax treaties, as aresident of a tax treaty partner may be denied the benefits of certainreduced withholding tax rates if the Beneficial Owner of thedividends etc is resident of a third country;" OECD dalam Paragraf 2.10 Commentary on Article 11 Model TaxConcention on Income and On Capital menyatakan bahwameskipun penduduk negara domisili adalah pemilik formalperusahaan, tetapi jika is memiliki kekuasaan yang sangat sempitatas penghasilan perusahaan, atau hanya sebagai pemegangamanah
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
8861 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • apply if more than 50 per cent of suchincome is used to satisfy claims by such persons (includinginterest, royalties, development, advertising, initial and travelexpenses, and depreciation of any kind of business assetsincluding those on immaterial goods and processes),Dalam buku berjudul "Beneficial Ownership of Royalties in BilateralTax Treaties" yang ditulis oleh Carl P. du Toit dikutip tulisan KlausVogel (Klaus Vogel on Double Taxation Conventions, 1997) yangmenyatakan sebagai berikut:Treaty benefits
    A person who enjoys the real benefits of ownership, even thoughthe title to the property is in another name. Often important in taxtreaties, as a resident of a tax treaty partner may be denied thebenefits of certain reduced withholding tax rates if the BeneficialOwner of the dividends etc. is resident of a third country (OECDTax Glossary);2.
Putus : 24-09-2013 — Upload : 14-12-2018
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 316 B/PK/PJK/2013
Tanggal 24 September 2013 — DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK VS PT. EKAMAS FORTUNA
5240 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • Dalam buku berfudul "Beneficial Ownership of Royalties in BilateralTax Treaties" yang ditulis oleh Carl P. du Toit dikutip tulisan KlausVogel (Klaus Vogel on Double Taxation Conventions, 1997) yangmenyatakan sebagai berikut :"Treaty benefits should not be granted with a view to a formal title todividends, interest, or royalties, but to the "real" title. In other words,the dispute of "form versus substance should be decided in favourof "substance"...
    A person who enjoys the real benefits of ownership, even thoughthe title to the property is in another name. Often important in taxtreaties, as a resident of a tax treaty partner may be denied thebenefits of certain reduced withholding tax rates if the beneficialowner of the dividends etc. is resident of a third country (OECDTax Glossary);b.
Putus : 18-02-2016 — Upload : 15-06-2016
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 1187 B/PK/PJK/2015
Tanggal 18 Februari 2016 — DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK vs PT. SEBANGUN BUMI ANDALAS WOOD INDUSTRIES
3423 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • OECD mendefinisikan Beneficial Owner sebagai A person whoenjoys the real benefits of ownership, even though the title to theproperty is in another name. Often important in tax treaties, as aresident of a tax treaty partner may be denied the benefits of certainreduced withholding tax rates if the Beneficial Owner of the devidensetc is resident of a third country;7.
Register : 17-11-2015 — Putus : 18-01-2016 — Upload : 18-05-2016
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 1206 B/PK/PJK/2015
Tanggal 18 Januari 2016 — DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK VS PT. PANASONIC GOBEL ENERGY INDONESIA;
8056 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • Putusan Nomor 1206/B/PK/PJK/2015would be prepared to pay a licence fee of the given amountconsidering the expected benefits from the additional investmentsand other expenditures likely to be incurred.Paragraf 6.15This analysis is important to ensure that an associatedenterprise is not required to pay an amount for the purchaseor use of intangible property that is based on the highest ormost productive use when the property is of more limitedusefulness to the associated enterprise given its businessoperations
    hasil analisiskesebandingan dicari transaksi pembanding yang sebanding dengantransaksi afiliasi Termohon Peninjauan Kembali (semula PemohonBanding), baru kemudian ditentukan metode transfer pricing yangdigunakan;Terkait dengan analisa kesebandingan dalam rangka mengujikewajaran royalti, seharusnya dilakukan analisis kesebandingandengan mempertimbangkan special factors dalam mengujikesebandingan royalti sesuai paragraf 6.20 OECD TP Guidelinesyang antara lain meliputi kesebandingan atas expected benefits
    Putusan Nomor 1206/B/PK/PJK/2015yang antara lain meliputi kesebandingan atas expected benefits fromthe intangible property (possibly determined through a net presentvalue calculation), any limitations on the geographic area in whichrights may be exercised; export restrictions on goods produced byvirtue of any rights transferred; the exclusive or nonexclusivecharacter of any rights transferred; the capital investment (toconstruct new plants or to buy special machines), the startupexpenses and the
Register : 21-09-2015 — Putus : 23-12-2015 — Upload : 10-03-2016
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 869 B/PK/PJK/2015
Tanggal 23 Desember 2015 — DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK VS PT. SEBANGUN BUMI ANDALAS WOOD INDUSTRIES;
3217 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • OECD mendefinisikan Beneficial Owner sebagai A person whoenjoys the real benefits of ownership, even though the title to theproperty is in another name. Often important in tax treaties, as aresident of a tax treaty partner may be denied the benefits of certainreduced withholding tax rates if the Beneficial Owner of the devidensetc is resident of a third country.7.
Register : 21-09-2015 — Putus : 30-11-2015 — Upload : 10-03-2016
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 856 B/PK/PJK/2015
Tanggal 30 Nopember 2015 — DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK VS PT. SEBANGUN BUMI ANDALAS WOOD INDUSTRIES;
3831 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • , apabilapemilik manfaat dari bunga tersebut adalah penduduk Negaralainnya, maka pajak yang dikenakan tidak akan melebihi 10%(sepuluh persen) dan jumlah bruto bunga;Bahwa berdasarkan Persetujuan Indonesia dan Belanda, ada duasyarat agar P3B dapat diterapkan yaitu domisili yang dibuktikan denganCertificate of Domicile (CoD) dan syarat sebagai Beneficial Owner (BO):" The Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development(OECD) mendefinisikan Beneficial Owner sebagai "A person whoenjoys the real benefits
    Often important in tax treaties, as aresident of a tax treaty partner may be denied the benefits of certainreduced withholding tax rates if the Beneficial Owner of the dividendsetc is resident of a third country"," OECD dalam Paragraf 2.10 Commentary on Article 11 Model TaxConcention on Income and On Capital menyatakan bahwa meskipunpenduduk negara domisili adalah pemilik formal perusahaan, tetapijika is memiliki kKekuasaan yang sangat sempit atas penghasilanperusahaan, atau hanya sebagai pemegang
Register : 17-11-2015 — Putus : 18-02-2016 — Upload : 17-05-2016
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 1157 B/PK/PJK/2015
Tanggal 18 Februari 2016 — DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK VS PT. SEBANGUN BUMI ANDALAS WOOD INDUSTRIES;
4119 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • OECD mendefinisikan beneficial owner sebagai A person who enjoysthe real benefits of ownership, even though the title to the property isin another name. Often important in tax treaties, as a resident of a taxtreaty partner may be denied the benefits of certain reducedHalaman 9 dari 36 halaman. Putusan Nomor 1157/B/PK/Pjk/2015withholding tax rates if the beneficial owner of the devidens etc isresident of a third country;7.
Putus : 08-03-2016 — Upload : 21-04-2017
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 2509 K/Pdt/2015
Tanggal 8 Maret 2016 — UNIVERSITAS INDONESIA dan UNIVERSITAS HASANUDDIN VS DAVID M.L. TOBING, S.H., M.Kn, DKK
12596 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • Menghormati privasi dan kerahasiaan subjek penelitian (respect forprovacy and countidentiality);Keadilan dan inklusivitas (respect for justice and indclusivensess);Mempertimbangkan manfaat dan kerugian yang ditimbulkan (balancingharm and benefits);Hal. 5 dari 18 hal.
Register : 17-11-2015 — Putus : 18-02-2016 — Upload : 14-09-2016
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 1156 B/PK/PJK/2015
Tanggal 18 Februari 2016 — DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK VS PT. SEBANGUN BUMI ANDALAS WOOD INDUSTRIES;
4728 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • OECD mendefinisikan Beneficial Owner sebagai A person whoenjoys the real benefits of ownership, even though the title to theproperty is in another name. Often important in tax treaties, as aresident of a tax treaty partner may be denied the benefits of certainreduced withholding tax rates if the Beneficial Owner of the devidensetc is resident of a third country.7.
Putus : 24-09-2008 — Upload : 19-01-2009
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 05PK/N/HaKI/2007
Tanggal 24 September 2008 — M/S UHIN HOLDING PTE. LTD ; HALUN LOREN ; PEMERINTAH REPUBLIK INDONESIA cq. DEPARTEMEN KEHAKIMAN DAN HAK ASASI MANUSIA cq. DIREKTORAT JENDERAL HAK KEKAYAAN INTELEKTUAL cq. DIREKTORAT MEREK.
8575 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • 6 bis (Marks:WellKnown Marks), berbunyi: "The Countries of the Union undertake,ex Officio if their legislation so permits, or at the request of an interestedparty, to refuse or to cancel the registration, and to prohibit the use, of atrademark which constitutes a reproducing, an imitation, or a translation,liabele to confusion, of a markconsideredby the competent ,authority ofthe country of registration or use to be well known in that country asbeing already the mark of a person entitled to the benefits
Putus : 29-09-2014 — Upload : 30-09-2015
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 2794 K/PDT/2013
Tanggal 29 September 2014 — UMAR SEMAN, Dkk vs PT. CHEVRON PACIFIC INDONESIA, Dk
4538 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • Eksepsi Kurang Pihak (Plurium Litis Consortium); Bahwa gugatan Para Penggugat kurang pihak, atau orang yang ditarik sebagaiTergugat tidak lengkap, dimana Para Penggugat sudah seharusnya menarik PT.Pertamina sebagai Tergugat, karena Tergugat merupakan Kontraktor ProductionSharing (KPS), dimana dalam Sharing Clouse adanya Sharing Rate 85%PERTAMINA dan PT. cpi 15%, maka beban gaji maupun benefits pegawaiditanggung oleh dan dibebankan pada PT.
Putus : 22-12-2015 — Upload : 14-09-2016
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 933/B/PK/PJK/2015
Tanggal 22 Desember 2015 — DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK vs PT SEBANGUN BUMI ANDALAS WOOD INDUSTRIES
3120 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • laws of that State, but if thebeneficial owner of the interest is a resident of the other State,the tax so charged shall not exceed 10 percent of the grossamount of the interest;Bahwa berdasarkan P3B Indonesia dan Belanda, ada dua syaratagar P3B dapat diterapkan yaitu domisili yang dibuktikan denganCertificate of Domicile (CoD) dan syarat sebagai Beneficial owner(BO);The Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development(OECD) mendefinisikan beneficial owner sebagai "A person whoenjoys the real benefits
    Often important in tax treaties, asa resident of a tax treaty partner may be denied the benefits ofcertain reduced withholding tax rates if the beneficial owner of thedividends etc is resident of a third country";OECD dalam Paragraf 2.10 Commentary on Article 11 Model TaxConcention on Income and On Capital menyatakan bahwameskipun penduduk negara domisili adalah pemilik formalperusahaan, tetapi jika is memiliki kekuasaan yang sangat sempitatas penghasilan perusahaan, atau hanya sebagai pemegangamanah
Putus : 01-01-1970 — Upload : 01-11-2017
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 946/B/PK/PJK/2017
Tanggal 1 Januari 1970 — DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK, VS PT COCA COLA INDONESIA
3153204 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • In that case, the distributorwould be entitled to compensation appropriate to itsagency activities alone and would not be entitled to sharein any return attributable to the marketing intangible.Where the distributor actually bears the cost of itsmarketing activities (i.e. there is no arrangement for theowner to reimburse the expenditures), the issue is theextent to which the distributor is able to share in thepotential benefits from those activities.
    For example, a distributor mayhave the ability to obtain benefits from its investments indeveloping the value of a trademark from its turnover andmarket share where it has a longterm contract of soledistribution rights for the trademarked product. In suchcases, the distributor's share of benefits should bedetermined based on what an independent distributorwould obtain in comparable circumstances.
Putus : 11-08-2015 — Upload : 30-10-2015
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 73 PK/Pdt.Sus-HKI/2015
Tanggal 11 Agustus 2015 — FEBRIYANTO VS CRC INDUSTRIES, INC
475269 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • ;Kutipan Pasal 6 bis Konvensi Paris:The countries of the Union undertake, ex ofFicio if their legislation sopermits, or at the reguest of an interested party, to refuse or to cancel theregistration, and to prohibit the use, of a trademark which constitutes areproduction an imitation, or a translation, liable to create confusion, of amark considered by the competent authority of the country of registrationor use to be well known in that country as being aiready the mark of aperson entiled to the benefits
Putus : 22-06-2015 — Upload : 14-09-2016
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 574 K/Pdt/2015
Tanggal 22 Juni 2015 — UNIVERSITAS ANDALAS (UNAND) melawan 1. DAVID M.L. TOBING, S.H., M.Kn, dkk
7440 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • Mempertimbangkan manfaat dan kerugian yang ditimbulkan(balancing harm and benefits); Bahwa tidak ada kewajiban bagi setiap peneliti dalam melakukanpenelitian ilmiah untuk menyampaikan hasil temuan penelitiannya kepadaseluruh masyarakat melalui mass media cetak tertutis maupun mediaelektronik lainnya; Bahwa penelitian yang dilakukan oleh Peneliti dari Institut PertanianBogor (IPB) adalah penelitian yang mengambil sample acak, dimanapeneliti tidak mengetahui sample susu yang ditelitinya tersebut berasaldari