Ditemukan 3002 data

Urut Berdasarkan
 
Register : 04-08-2015 — Putus : 12-08-2015 — Upload : 27-08-2015
Putusan PT JAYAPURA Nomor 62/Pid/2015/PT JAP
Tanggal 12 Agustus 2015 — EDISON WERIMON, A.Ma.Pd Alias EDI, dkk
23260
  • (SenateRepublik Melanesia Regional Kab.Sarmi) daftar terlampir ;1 (satu) lembar foto copy KTP 2 (dua) lembar foto dan 1 (stau)lembar surat THE STATE REPUBLIK THE DATE BIBLIOGRAFI OF THE SENATOR STATE PUBLIC OFMELANESIA ;8 (delapan) lembar surat undangan Propinsi Papua Utara SenateRepublik Melanesia an.
    Nopember 2013 ;2 (dua) lembar surat pengantar Nomor 01/SNTRM/RSRM.2013tanggal 25 November dan 1 (satu) amplop warna putih yangbertuliskan Senate Republik Melanesia Negara Bagian RegionalSarmi kepada Kabupaten Sarmi di Kota Baru Petam Sarmi ;2 (dua) lembar sura pengantar Nomor 01/SNTRM/RSM 2013tanggal 25 November 2013 dan 1 (satu) amplop warna putih yangbertuliskan Senate Republik Melanesia Negara Bagian RegionalSarmi kepada Kabag keuangan kabupaten Sarmi di Kota BaruPetam Sarmi ;2 (dua) lembar State
    PID/2015/PT JAP.7 Indonesia oleh sekretariat keadilan dan perdamaian keuskupan JayapuraMei 2000 ;1 (satu) lembar foto copy surat Nasional suara pembaharuankamis tanggal 28 Nopember 2002 berbeda dengan masalah diAceh Panglima TNI akui penyelesaian papua lebih rumit ;1 (satu) lembar foto copy surat Presedium dewan papua wakilketua TOMBEANAL ;1 (satu) lembar foto copy surat Presedium dewan papua kalemderNasional Papua 2002 ;1 (satu) lembar foto copy surat keputusan siding PBB ;1 (atu) lembar bendera State
    THOMASWAFAI WANGGAI tanggal 14 Desember 1988 ;e 2 (dua) lembar kertas yang bertuliskan Thema ibadah pengucapansyukur Hut The international of nederland new Guinea 25 tahunsementara ke RI tanggal 01 Mey 196201 Mei 1988 (yang ke51)Halaman 7 dari Hal.14 Put.No. 62/PID/2015/PT JAP.e 8tanggal 01 Mey 2013 ;e 5 (dima) lembar kertas pengisian Bio Data Anggota SenateNegara Republik of Melanesia ;e 2(dua) lembar gambar bendera melanesia ;e 5 dima) lembar Hut ke25 State Republik of Melanesia 14Desember 198814
    Sarmi) Daftar terlampir;1 (satu) lembar Foto Copy KTP, 2 (dua) lembar Foto dan 1 (satu) lembarSurat THE STATE REPUBLIK MELANESIA THE DATE BIBLIO GRAFIOF THE SENATOR STATE PUBLIC OF MELANESIA;8 (delapan) lembar Surat undangan Propinsi Papua Utara Senate RepublikMelanesia an.
Putus : 20-10-2016 — Upload : 15-12-2016
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 1056/B/PK/PJK/2016
Tanggal 20 Oktober 2016 — PT MITRA AUSTRAL SEJAHTERA VS DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK,
6233 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • Banding) tidaksetuju dengan koreksi Termohon Peninjauan Kembali (semulaTerbanding) yang mendasarkan saat terutangnya PPh Pasal 26 tersebutjuga ditentukan berdasarkan saat pengakuan biaya sesuai denganmetode pembukuan yang dianut oleh pihak yang berkewajibanmemotong atau memungut Pajak Penghasilan;Bahwa menurut Pemohon Peninjauan Kembali (Semula PemohonBanding) sesuai dengan Perjanjian Penghindaran Pajak Berganda (TaxTreaty) Indonesia Malaysia yang menyebutkan bahwa Interest arisingin a Contracting State
    and paid to a resident of the other ContractingState may be taxed in that other State", sehingga PPh Pasal 26 yangdibayarkan Pemohon Peninjauan Kembali (Semula Pemohon Banding)kepada Austral Enterprises Berhad (sekarang berganti nama menjadiSime Darby Austral Holdings Berhad) terutang pada saat terjadipembayaran dan bukan pada saat pencatatan (accrual);Bahwa Koreksi Dasar Pengenaan Pajak PPh Pasal 26 Masa PajakFebruari s.d.
    Malaysia)sebagaimana dimaksud dalam Pasal 11 Tax Treaty antar PemerintahIndonesia dan Malaysia yang disetujui tanggal 12 September 1991merupakan peraturan yang lebih tinggi dari UndangUndang Nomor 7Tahun 1983 tentang Pajak Penghasilan sebagaimana telahbeberapa kali diubah terakhir dengan UndangUndang Nomor 36Tahun 2008 dan peraturan perundangan di bawahnya;Berdasarkan Pasal 11 ayat (1) Perjanjian Penghindaran PajakBerganda (7ax Treaty) Indonesia Malaysia, dinyatakan:Interest arising in a Contracting State
    and paid to a resident of theother Contracting State may be taxed in that other State";Atau dalam Bahasa Indonesia berarti bahwa bunga yang berasal darisuatu Negara pihak pada Persetujuan dan dibayarkan kepadapenduduk Negara pihak pada Persetujuan lainnya dapat dikenakanpajak di Negara lain tersebut;Pemohon Peninjauan Kembali (Ssemula Pemohon Banding)berpendapat atas accrual bunga pinjaman kepada AustralEnterprises Berhad (sekarang berganti nama menjadi Sime DarbyAustral Holdings Berhad) terutang
    Putusan Nomor 1056/B/PK/PJK/2016"In the event of there being a dispute in the interpretation and theapplication of this Agreement, the English text shall prevail";Dalam hal terjadi perbedaan penafsiran dan pelaksanaan daripersetujuan ini maka teks dalam Bahasa Inggris yang akandigunakan;Bahwa dalam hal kata paid yang digunakan pada Interest arising ina Contracting State and paid to a resident of the other ContractingState may be taxed in that other State", Pemohon PeninjauanKembali (Semula Pemohon
Register : 06-07-2011 — Putus : 25-01-2013 — Upload : 14-07-2013
Putusan PENGADILAN PAJAK Nomor Put-42825/PP/M.VI/15/2013
Tanggal 25 Januari 2013 — Pemohon Banding dan Terbanding
16579
  • diperlakukansebagai biayabiaya yang dapat dikurangkan dalam perhitungan pajak, selainitu Royalty tersebut dikbayarkan berdasarakn Technology Agreement antaraNV Bekaert SA dengan Pemohon Banding.bahwa dalam tahun 2008 Pemohon Banding laba tetapi tidak membagikandividen kepada pemegang saham, jadi pembayaran Royalty tersebutmerupakan dividen terselubung.bahwa hal ini sesuai dengan OECD model yang menyatakan Attention drawngenerally to the following case, the beneficial owner of royalties incontracting state
    is a company resident in the other contracting state, all orpart of its capital held by shareholders resident outside that other state, itpractice is not distribute its profit in form of dividend and its enjoypreferential tax treatment (harus diperhatikan adanya pemegang saham yangtidak mendapatkan dividen tetapi menikmatinya dalam bentuk lain, dalam halini dalam bentuk soyalti), sehingga pendapat Pemohon Banding yangmenyatakan tidak ada satupun aturan yang melarang royalty sebagai biaya,adalah
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
225116
  • 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 : 18-01-2019 — Putus : 12-02-2019 — Upload : 13-05-2019
Putusan PA BARRU Nomor 5/Pdt.P/2019/PA.Br
Tanggal 12 Februari 2019 — Pemohon melawan Termohon
151
  • Menyatakan sah perkawinan antara Pemohon I Sopyan Syam bin Samsul, dan Pemohon II Sulpiah binti Ladupe yang dilaksanakan pada tanggal 07 September 2010 di Asia Oil PALM State, Malaysia

    3. Membebankan kepada para Pemohon untuk membayar biaya perkara sejumlah Rp. 291.000,00 ( dua ratus sembilan puluh satu ribu rupiah).

Putus : 06-02-2014 — Upload : 19-12-2014
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 806/B/PK/PJK/2013
Tanggal 6 Februari 2014 — DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK VS PT. NU SKIN DISTRIBUTION INDONESIA
4821 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • unless such resident carries on business in thatother Contracting State through a permanent establishment situated therein.
    If suchresident carries on business as aforesaid, tax may be imposed by that other ContractingState on the business profits of such resident but only on so much of such profits as areattributable to the permanent establishment or arederived from sources within such other Contracting State from sales of goods orHalaman 15 dari 25 halaman.
    Putusan Nomor 806/B/PK/PJK/2013merchandise of the same kind as those sold, or from other business transactions of thesame kinds as those effected, through the permanent establishment;a Where a resident of one of the Contracting States carries on business in theother Contracting State through a permanent establishment situated therein, there shallin each Contracting State be attributed to the permanent establishment the businessprofits which would be attributable to such permanent establishment if
    may be taxed by both Contracting States;2 The rate of tax imposed by a Contracting State on royalties derived from sourceswithin that Contracting State and beneficially owned by a resident of the otherContracting State shall not exceed 10 percent of the gross amount of royalties describedin paragraph 3;3 (a) The term "royalties" as used in this Article means payments of anykind made as consideration for the use of, or the right to use, copyrightsof literary, artistic, or scientific works (including
    under Article 9 (Shipping and AirTransport);4 Paragraph 2 shall not apply if the recipient of the royalty, being a resident ofone of the Contracting States, has in the other Contracting State a permanentestablishment or fixed base and the property or rights giving rise to the royalty iseffectively connected with such permanent establishment.
Register : 01-08-2016 — Putus : 20-10-2016 — Upload : 30-11-2016
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 1059 B/PK/PJK/2016
Tanggal 20 Oktober 2016 — PT. MITRA AUSTRAL SEJAHTERA VS DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK;
5332 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • Putusan Nomor 1059/B/PK/PJK/2016Bahwa menurut Pemohon Peninjauan Kembali (semula Pemohon Banding)sesuai dengan Perjanjian Penghindaran Pajak Berganda (Tax Treaty)Indonesia Malaysia yang menyebutkan bahwa Interest arising in aContracting State and paid to a resident of the other Contracting State maybe taxed in that other State", sehingga PPh Pasal 26 yang dibayarkanPemohon Peninjauan Kembali (semula Pemohon Banding) kepada AustralEnterprises Berhad (sekarang berganti nama menjadi Sime Darby AustralHoldings
    Malaysia) sebagaimana dimaksud dalamPasal 11 Tax Treaty antar Pemerintah Indonesia dan Malaysia yangdisetujui tanggal 12 September 1991 merupakan peraturan yang lebihtinggi dari UndangUndang Nomor 7 Tahun 1983 tentang PajakPenghasilan sebagaimana telah beberapa kali diubah terakhir denganUndangUndang Nomor 36 Tahun 2008 dan peraturan perundangandibawahnya.Berdasarkan Pasal 11 ayat (1) Perjanjian Penghindaran PajakBerganda (Tax Treaty) Indonesia Malaysia, dinyatakan:Interest arising in a Contracting State
    and paid to a resident of the otherContracting State may be taxed in that other State"Atau dalam Bahasa Indonesia berarti bahwa bunga yang berasal darisuatu Negara pihak pada Persetujuan dan dibayarkan kepadapenduduk Negara pihak pada Persetujuan lainnya dapat dikenakanpajak di Negara lain tersebut.Pemohon Peninjauan Kembali (semulaPemohon Banding) berpendapatatas accrual bunga pinjaman kepada Austral Enterprises Berhad(sekarang berganti nama menjadi Sime Darby Austral Holdings Berhad)terutang PPh
    Putusan Nomor 1059/B/PK/PJK/2016Dalam hal terjadi perbedaan penafsiran dan pelaksanaan daripersetujuan ini maka teks dalam Bahasa Inggris yang akan digunakan.Bahwa dalam hal kata paid yang digunakan pada Interest arising inaContracting State and paid to a resident of the other Contracting Statemay be taxed in that other State", Pemohon Peninjauan Kembali(semula Pemohon Banding) menggunakan merriamwebster dictionarydalam http://www.merriamwebster.com.
Register : 03-03-2014 — Putus : 26-05-2014 — Upload : 27-12-2019
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 112 B/PK/PJK/2014
Tanggal 26 Mei 2014 — PT. LIPPO BANK VS DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK;
17099 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • under Article 9 (Shipping and AirTransport)";Bahwa Pasal 8 ayat 1 Persetujuan Penghindaran Pajak Berganda(P3B) antara Indonesia dan Amerika menyebutkan bahwa:Business profits of a resident of one of the Contracting States shall beexempt from tax by the other Contracting State unless such residentcarries on business in that other Contracting State through a permanentestablishment situated therein.
    unless such resident carrieson business in that other Contracting State through a permanentestablishment situated therein.
    If such resident carries on business asaforesaids, tax may be imposed by that other Contracting State on thebusiness profits of such resident but only on so much of such profits as areHalaman 11 dari 36 halaman.
    within that Contracting State and beneficially owned by a residentof the other Contracting State shall not exceed 15 percent of the grossamount of royalties described in paragraph 3(a) and 10 percent of the grossamount of royalties described in paragraph 3(b)";Bahwa Pasal 13 ayat 3 a Persetujuan Penghindaran Pajak Berganda (P3B)antara Indonesia dan Amerika menyebutkan bahwa:"The term "royalties" as used in this Article means payments of any kindmade as consideration for the use of, or the right
    under Article 9 (Shipping and Air Transport)";Bahwa lebih lanjut Pasal 13 ayat 2 Persetujuan Penghindaran PajakBerganda (P3B) antara Indonesia dan Amerika menyebutkan bahwa:"The rate of tax imposed by a Contracting State on royalties derived fromsources within that Contracting State and beneficially owned by a residentof the other Contracting State shall not exceed 15 percent of the grossHalaman 12 dari 36 halaman.
Putus : 13-10-2017 — Upload : 21-11-2018
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 2011 K/Pid.Sus/2017
Tanggal 13 Oktober 2017 — LUTHFI RIZKY RAMADHAN alias LUTHFI
186119 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • Terdakwa mengikuti kelompoktersebut kurang lebih selama setahun sampai tahun 2015 dan selamamengikuti ALMANAR Terdakwa berkenalan dengan Anggota ALMANARantara lain dengan saksi DODI dan saksi JUNEDI alias JJ; Bahwa kemudian sekitar awal tahun 2015 Terdakwa bergabung denganJemaah Ansor Khilafah (JAK) Cirebon dengan Ketua AGUNGFIRMANSYAH alias AGUNG BROWNIS dan Terdakwa bergabung denganJemaah Ansor Khilafah Cirebon karena Terdakwa mengetahui JemaahAnsor Khilafah Cirebon mendukung kelompok Islamic State
    Pada saat itu Terdakwa bersama Saksi JUNEDIalias JJ, Saksi ALI MAKHMUDIN alias LULU, Saksi CUNAEDI alias ABUSALMA hadir dalam acara tersebut sedangkan yang mengisi kajian USTADFAUZAN AL ANSORY bersama Asistennya yakni Saksi ALI HAMKAsedangkan Materi kajian yang diberikan USTAD FAUZAN AL ANSORImengenai perkembangan Daulah Khilafah ISIS yang kini bernama IS(Islamic State) di Suriah yang ditunjukkannya melalui tayangan slide denganbantuan alat proyektor seperti : Luas Wilayah yang telah dikuasai ISIS
    Cara yang dapatdilakukan untuk memerangi musuhmusuh ISIS di Indonesia dapatdilakukan dengan cara ditembak atau dengan ditusuk menggunakan senjatatajam;Bahwa diakhir kajian peserta yang hadir termasuk Terdakwa dibaiat olehUSTAD FAUZAN AL ANSORI untuk mendukung dan taat kepada DAULAHISIS di Suriah yang kini berganti nama menjadi IS (ISLAMIC STATE)dibawah pimpinan SYEH ABU BAKAR AL BAGDADI, dengan telahdibaiatnya Terdakwa bersama yang lainnya tersebut maka Terdakwa resmimenjadi warga khilafah Islamiyah
    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 Wilayah Jawa Barat dijabat oleh ustad KHAIRUL ANAM sebagaiAMIR/Ketua WILAYAH;Yang membawahi beberapa MUDIRIYAH atau Kabupaten yakni antara lain :Hal. 6 dari 21 hal. Putusan No. 2011 K/Pid.Sus/201 71).
    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 Wilayah Jawa Barat dijabat oleh ustad KHAIRUL ANAM sebagaiAMIR/Ketua WILAYAH;Yang membawahi beberapa MUDIRIYAH atau Kabupaten yakni antara lain :1). Mudiriyah Cirebon dijabat oleh Sdr.
Register : 26-01-2017 — Putus : 22-02-2017 — Upload : 07-04-2017
Putusan PT JAKARTA Nomor 26/PID.SUS/2017/PT.DKI
Tanggal 22 Februari 2017 — LUTHFI RIZKY RAMADHAN alias LUTHFI
243173
  • (/slamic State) di Suriah yang ditunjukkannya melaluitayangan slide dengan bantuan alat proyektor seperti : Luas wilayah yang telah dikuasai ISIS; Suasana Daulah Khilafah ISIS; Menunjukkan video peperangan ISIS; Pemberlakuan hukum Islam yang dilakukan dengan carapemenggalan, rajam, cambuk;Ustad Fauzan Al Ansory saat itu juga menerangkan musuhmusuh ISISdi Suriah yang harus diperangi yakni Syiah, Murtadin, PKK (PartaiKomunis Kurdi), SWAT Amerika, Rofidoh, Nusairiah.
    Cara yang dapatdilakukan untuk memerangi musuhmusuh Isis di Indonesia dapatdilakukan dengan cara ditembak atau dengan ditusuk menggunakansenjata tajam;Bahwa di akhir kajian peserta yang hadir termasuk Terdakwa dibaiatoleh Ustad Fauzan Al Ansory untuk mendukung dan taat kepada DaulahHalaman 4 Putusan Nomor 26/P1D.SUS/2017/FT OKI.Isis di Suriah yang kini berganti nama menjadi IS (ISLAMIC STATE) dibawah pimpinan Syekh Abu Bakar Al Bagdadi, dengan telah dibaiatnyaTerdakwa bersama yang lainnya tersebut
    Sebagai Amir Tertinggi IS (/slamic State) di Indonesia yaitu AbuBakar Baasyir dan Oman Abdulrahman (warga binaan Lapas NusaKambangan);2. Bertindak sebagai Pendakwah adalah Ustad Fauzan Al Ansory;Kemudian wilayah Jawa Barat dijabat oleh ustad Khairul Anam sebagaiAmir/Ketua Wilayah;Yang membawahi beberapa Mudiriyah/Kabupaten yakni antara lain :1. Mudiriyah Cirebon dijabat oleh sdr.
Register : 08-05-2020 — Putus : 02-07-2020 — Upload : 03-12-2020
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 2467 B/PK/PJK/2020
Tanggal 2 Juli 2020 — PT. CHAROEN POKPHAND INDONESIA TBK vs DIREKTUR JENDERAL BEA DAN CUKAI;
16143 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • Pademangan, Jakarta Utara, dan menetapkan atas barang imporUnited State meat and bone meal (tepung daging dan tulang) bahan bakupakan ternak sebanyak 41,68 MT, Negara asal: United State Pos Tarif2309.90.90 yang diberitahukan dengan PIB Nomor 010724 tanggal 26September 2017 dikenakan pembebanan PPN sebesar 10%, sehinggatagihan PPN impor yang harus dibayar sebesar Rp 74.481.000,00 (tujuhpuluh empat juta empat ratus delapan puluh satu ribu rupiah);Menimbang, bahwa sesudah putusan terakhir ini diberitahukankepada
    Agung berpendapat:Alasanalasan permohonan Pemohon Peninjauan Kembali tidak dapatdibenarkan, karena putusan Pengadilan Pajak yang menyatakan menolakbanding Pemohon Banding terhadap Keputusan Terbanding Nomor: KEP107/ WBC.09/2017 tanggal 28 Desember 2017, tentang Penetapan atasKeberatan terhadap Surat Penetapan Tarif dan/atau Nilai Pabean (SPTNP)Nomor: 000707/WBC.08/KPPMP.07/NTL/2017 tanggal 03 Oktober 2017,atas nama Pemohon Banding, NPWP: 01.000.172.5092.000; danmenetapkan atas barang impor United State
    meat and bone meal (tepungdaging dan tulang) bahan baku pakan ternak sebanyak 41,68 MT, Negaraasal: United State Pos Tarif 2309.90.90 yang diberitahukan dengan PIBNomor 010724 tanggal 26 September 2017 dikenakan pembebanan PPNsebesar 10%, sehingga tagihan PPN impor yang harus dibayar sebesarRp74.481.000,00; adalah sudah tepat dan benar dengan pertimbangan:a.
Putus : 20-03-2019 — Upload : 28-05-2019
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 890/B/PK/Pjk/2019
Tanggal 20 Maret 2019 — BUT SALAMANDER ENERGY (NORTH SUMATRA) LIMITED VS DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK
9048 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • Keempat, in casu Branch Profit Tax, memilikiketerkaitan hubungan hukum (innerlijke samenhang) antara KontrakBagi Hasil (Production Sharing Contract) dengan P3B Indonesia Inggrissebagaimana yang dimuat dalam Article 10.7 yang menyatakan bahwa:Not with standing any other provisions of this Agreement, where acompany which is a resident of a Contracting State, having a permanentestablishment in that Contracting State, derives profits through of thepermanent establishment, such profits may be taxed (in
    an addition to betax which would be chargeable on those profits if they were the profits ofa company which was a resident of that other Contracting State) inaccordance with the laws of the Contracting State, but the rate of tax soimposed shall not exceed 10 per cent of the profits of the permanentestablishment after payment of the income tax on those profits;Halaman 5 dari 11 halaman.
    pajakpajaklainnya yang dikenakan atas penghasilan di Negara lainnya tersebut);Kelima, Selanjutnya Pasal 10 ayat (8) antara P3B IndonesiaInggrismenyatakan bahwa: The provisions of paragraph 7 of this Article shallnot affect the provisions contained in any production sharing contractsand contracts of work (or any similar contracts) relating to the oil or gassector or other mining sector entered into by a resident of the UnitedKingdom with the Government of Indonesia, its instrumentality, itsrelevant state
Putus : 17-10-2012 — Upload : 08-09-2014
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 155 B/PK/PJK/2011
Tanggal 17 Oktober 2012 — DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK VS PT. BOSKALIS INTERNATIONAL INDONESIA
107118 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • (The profits of an enterprise of a Contracting State shall be taxableonly in that Contracting State unless the enterprise carries on business in theContracting State through a permanent establishment situated therein ;If the enterprise carries on business as aforesaid, the profits of the enterprisemay be taxed in that other Contracting State but only so much of them as isattributable, to that permanent establishment);Halaman 7 dari 31 halaman Putusan Nomor 155/B/PK/PJK/2011Bahwa selain Tax Treaty
    (An insurance enterprise of one of the two Statesshall, except with regard to reinsurance, be deemed to have a permanent establishmentin the other State if it collects premiums in the territory of that other State or insuresrisks situated therein through an employee or through a representative who is not anagent of an independent status within the meaning of paragraph 7) ;Bahwa kemudian mendasarkan pada Poin 4 b Surat Edaran Direktur JenderalPajak Nomor SE03/PJ.101/1996 tanggal 29 Maret 1996 Tentang
    Bahwa article 7 ayat 1 Agreement Between The Republic of Indonesia and TheRepublic of Singapore For The Avoidance of Double Taxation And ThePrevention of Fiscal Evasion With Respect to Taxes on Income (P3B)menyebutkan "the profits.of an enterprise 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 theenterprise carries on business as aforesaid, the profits of the enterprise may betaxed in the other State but only so much of them as is attributable to thatpermanent establishment ;"Laba perusahaan disuatu Negara hanya akan dikenakan pajak di Negara itukecuali perusahaan itu menjalankan usahanya di Negara lainnya, melalui suatupendirian tetap yang berkedudukan disitu.
    Bahwa article 7 ayat 1 Agreement Between Japan and The Republic of IndonesiaFor The Avoidance of Double Taxation And The Prevention of Fiscal EvasionWith Respect to Taxes on Income (P3B) menyebutkan 'The profits of anenterprise of a Contracting State shall be taxable only in that Contracting Stateunless the enterprise carries on business in the other Contracting State througha permanent establishment situated therein.
Putus : 17-04-2017 — Upload : 05-10-2017
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 310 K/Pdt.Sus-KPPU/2017
Tanggal 17 April 2017 — TORAY ADVANCE MATERIALS KOREA Inc VS KOMISI PENGAWAS PERSAINGAN USAHA (KPPU),
575311 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • Konsep kedaulatan negara (state sovereignty) yang dianut dalam hukuminternasional juga pada dasarnya tidak mengijinkan suatu negaramelaksanakan kedaulatannya (termasuk dalam bidang hukum) terhadapwarga negara Indonesia yang melakukan suatu perobuatan hukum di dalamwilayah territorial negara Republik Indonesia.
    Territory is acondition for a state to exist and a limitation to its rights, a state is sovereignand has jurisdiction only within its territory........ a state may not exercise itspowers in any form in the territory of another state unless there is apermissive rule to the contrary........... The United States has sought toimplement its antitrust laws, the Sherman Act, which has both civil andcriminal features......
    Mengenai kedaulatan negara dan hak berdaulat di wilayah yurisdiksi suatunegara, Blacks Law Dictionary (Abridged sixth edition, hal. 981)memberikan definisi sebagai berikut:"state sovereignty: the right of a state to selfgovernment",Terjemahan bahasa Indonesia:Kedaulatan negara: hak suatu negara untuk memerintah sendiri;Robert Beckrnan dan Dagmer Butte dalam "Introduction to InternationalLaw" (https://www.scriobd.com) menyatakan:Halaman 7 dari 13 hal.
Putus : 20-10-2016 — Upload : 15-12-2016
Putusan MAHKAMAH AGUNG Nomor 1055/B/PK/PJK/2016
Tanggal 20 Oktober 2016 — PT MITRA AUSTRAL SEJAHTERA VS DIREKTUR JENDERAL PAJAK
6044 Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap
  • Banding) tidaksetuju. dengan koreksi Termohon Peninjauan Kembali (semulaTerbanding) yang mendasarkan saat terutangnya PPh Pasal 26 tersebutjuga ditentukan berdasarkan saat pengakuan biaya sesuai denganmetode pembukuan yang dianut oleh pihak yang berkewajibanmemotong atau memungut Pajak Penghasilan;Bahwa menurut Pemohon Peninjauan Kembali (Semula PemohonBanding) sesuai dengan Perjanjian Penghindaran Pajak Berganda (TaxTreaty) Indonesia Malaysia yang menyebutkan bahwa /nterest arisingin a Contracting State
    and paid to a resident of the other ContractingState may be taxed in that other State", sehingga PPh Pasal 26 yangdibayarkan Pemohon Peninjauan Kembali (semula Pemohon Banding)kepada Austral Enterprises Berhad (sekarang berganti nama menjadiSime Darby Austral Holdings Berhad) terutang pada saat terjadipembayaran dan bukan pada saat pencatatan (accrual);Bahwa Koreksi Dasar Pengenaan Pajak PPh Pasal 26 Masa PajakFebruari s.d.
    and paid to a resident of theother Contracting State may be taxed in that other State";Atau dalam Bahasa Indonesia berarti bahwa bunga yang berasal darisuatu Negara pihak pada Persetujuan dan dibayarkan kepadapenduduk Negara pihak pada Persetujuan lainnya dapat dikenakanpajak di Negara lain tersebut;Pemohon Peninjauan Kembali (Ssemula Pemohon Banding)berpendapat atas accrual bunga pinjaman kepada AustralEnterprises Berhad (sekarang berganti nama menjadi Sime DarbyAustral Holdings Berhad) terutang
    Putusan Nomor 1055/B/PK/PJK/2016"In the event of there being a dispute in the interpretation and theapplication of this Agreement, the English text shall prevail";Dalam hal terjadi perbedaan penafsiran dan pelaksanaan daripersetujuan ini maka teks dalam Bahasa Inggris yang akandigunakan;Bahwa dalam hal kata paid yang digunakan pada /nterest arising ina Contracting State and paid to a resident of the other ContractingState may be taxed in that other State", Pemohon PeninjauanKembali (semula Pemohon
    Bahwa berdasarkan Pasal 1 Jax Treaty Indonesia Malaysia:This Agreement shall apply to persons who are residentsof one or both of the Contracting State;Bahwa persetujuan ini berlaku terhadap orang dan badanyang merupakan penduduk salah satu atau kedua Negarapihak pada persetujuan.
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
  • 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.
    Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph 2, interest arising 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; orHalaman 15 dari 36 halaman Putusan Nomor 307/B/PK/PJK/2015(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 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.
    Notwithstanding the provision of paragraph 2, interest arising in one ofthe other Stares shall be taxable only in the other State if the BeneficialOwner of the interest is a resident of the other State and if the interest ispaid on a loan made for a period of more than 2 years or is paid inconnection with the sale on credit of any industrial, commercial orscientific equipment.5.
    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.
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;
13387 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.
    Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph 2, interest arising 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 authonties thereof; orHalaman 18 dari 40 halaman.
    Putusan Nomor 669/B/PK/PJK/2013(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 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
    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 with which the State ofsource had concluded a convention.
    Commentary on Article 11 Paragraph 10:veeeee 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 : 24-11-2011 — Putus : 13-02-2013 — Upload : 14-07-2013
Putusan PENGADILAN PAJAK Nomor Put. 43274/PP/M.I/13/2013
Tanggal 13 Februari 2013 — Pemohon Banding dan Terbanding
20775
  • bahwa selanjutnya Pasal 13 ayat (3b) Persetujuan Penghindaran Pajak Berganda (P3B) antaraIndonesia dan Amerika menyebutkan bahwa :"The term "royalties" as used in this Article also includes payments by a resident of one of theContracting States for the use of, or the fight to use, industrial, commercial or scientific equipment,but not including ships, aircraft or containers the income from which is exempt from tax by the otherContracting State under Article 9 (Shipping and Air Transport)"bahwa Pasal
    8 ayat (1) Persetujuan Penghindaran Pajak Berganda (P3B) antara Indonesia danAmerika menyebutkan bahwa :"Business profits of a resident of one of the Contracting States shall be exempt from tax by the otherContracting State unless such resident carries on business in that other Contracting State through apermanent establishment situated therein.
    If such resident carries on business as aforesaids,tax maybe imposed by that other Contracting State on the business profits of such resident but only on somuch of such profits as are attributable to the permanent establishment or are derived from sourceswithin such other Contracting State from sales of goods or merchandise of the same kind as thosesold, or from other business transactions of the same kinds as those effected, through the permanentestabtishment"bahwa Pemohon Banding mengemukakan,
Register : 16-11-2011 — Putus : 04-06-2014 — Upload : 29-06-2015
Putusan PENGADILAN PAJAK Nomor PUT-52925/PP/M.XIIA/13/2014
Tanggal 4 Juni 2014 — Pemohon Banding dan Terbanding
21381
  • ,Amerika Serikat, merupakan pembayaran royalty kepada perusahaan yangberdomisili (Tax Resident) di Amerika Serikat;bahwa berdasarkan Tax Treaty (P3B) antara Indonesia dengan Amerika Serikat,Pasal 13 ayat (1, 2 dan 3), menyebutkan :Royalties derived from sources within one of the Contracting States by a resident ofthe other Contracting State may be taxed by both Contracting States;The rate of tax imposed by a Contracting State on royalties derived from sourceswithin that Contracting State and beneficially
    owned by a resident of the otherContracting State shall not exceed 15 percent of the gross amount of royaltiesdescribed in paragraph 3 (a) and 10 percent of the gross amount of royaltiesdescribed in paragraph 3 (b);a.
    shall be taxable only in that Stateunless the enterprise carries on business in the other Contracting State through apermanent establishment situated therein, If the enterprise carries on business asaforesaid, the profits of the enterprise may be taxed in the other State but only somuch of them as is attributable to that permanent establishment;bahwa berdasarkan Tax Treaty antara Indonesia dengan Inggris, Pasal 5 ayat (3)dan Pasal 7 ayat (1) menyatakan :Pasal 5 ayat (3)The term "permanent establishment
    " likewise includes:(a) a building site, a construction, assembly or installation project or supervisoryactivities in connection therewith, but only where such site, project or activitiescontinue for a period of more than 183 days;(b) the furnishing of services, including consultancy services, by an enterprisethrough employees or other personnel engaged by the enterprise for such purpose,but only where activities of that nature continue (for the same or connected project)within the Contracting State
    for a period or periods aggregating more than 91 dayswithin any continuous period of twelve months;Pasal 7 ayat (1)The profits of an enterprise of a Contracting State shall be taxable only in that Stateunless the enterprise carries on business in the other Contracting State through apermanent establishment situated therein, If the enterprise carries on business asaforesaid, the profits of the enterprise may be taxed in the other State but only somuch of them as is directly or indirectly attributable
Register : 30-10-2012 — Putus : 25-07-2013 — Upload : 27-11-2013
Putusan PENGADILAN PAJAK Nomor PUT.46436/PP/M.VII/16/2013
Tanggal 25 Juli 2013 — Pemohon Banding dan Terbanding
11624
  • Otoritas penerbit harus diberitahu alasanpenolakan penggunaan tarif preferensi tersebut;In cases when a Certificate of Origin (Form D) is rejected by the customs authorityof the importing Member State, the subject Certificate of Origin (Form D) shall bemarked accordingly in Box 4 and the original Certificate of Origin (Form D) shall bereturned to the issuing authority within a reasonable period not exceeding sixty (60)days.
    notified of the grounds for the denial of tariffpreference,bahwa dalam hal Surat Keterangan Asal/SKA (Form ID) tidak dapat diterima,sebagaimana dijelaskan dalam paragraph sebelumnya, negara pengimpor harusmenerima dan mempertimbangkan penjelasan dari otoritas penerbit dan menetapkankembali apakah Form D tersebut dapat diterima atau tidak untuk mendapatkan tarifpreferensi;In the case where Certificates of Origin (Form D) are not accepted, as stated in thepreceding paragraph, the importing Member State
    should accept and consider theclarifications made by the issuing authorities and assess again whether or not theForm D application can be accepted for the granting of the preferential treatment.The clarifications should be detailed and exhaustive in addressing the grounds ofdenial of preference raised by the importing Member State.2. bahwa berdasarkan situs Kementerian Perdagangan dan Industri Malaysiaiti 2id= c0a8156f50c 650c65087b3c5 menyatakan: bahwa dalam hal adanya penolakan atau keraguan dari