Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (2) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2019 (2) TMI 2044 - AT - Income Tax


Issues Involved:
- Dispute regarding the attribution of income to Permanent Establishment (PE) in India
- Application of transfer pricing provisions under Chapter X of the Income Tax Act, 1961
- Arm's length price principle for commission payments
- Validity of addition to returned income by Assessing Officer
- Interpretation of relevant legal precedents

Detailed Analysis:

1. Dispute Regarding Income Attribution to PE in India:
The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai involved a dispute over the Assessing Officer's decision to attribute additional income of Rs. 5,15,05,000 to the Permanent Establishment (PE) of the appellant in India. The appellant argued that it had appropriately attributed profits based on operations in India and in compliance with the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) between India and Singapore.

2. Application of Transfer Pricing Provisions:
The appellant contended that it had followed transfer pricing provisions of Chapter X of the Income Tax Act to determine the income attributable to its agency PE in India. The Assessing Officer, however, estimated profits at an ad-hoc rate, leading to the disputed addition to the income.

3. Arm's Length Price Principle for Commission Payments:
The appellant maintained that the commission paid to its Indian subsidiary was at an arm's length price, as affirmed by the transfer pricing analysis and reports. The appellant argued that no further income should be attributed to its agency PE in India beyond the arm's length commission payments.

4. Validity of Addition to Returned Income:
The Tribunal considered legal precedents, including judgments by the Supreme Court and High Courts, supporting the appellant's position. The Tribunal concluded that if the arm's length price had been applied and paid, no further income should be attributable to the PE of the foreign enterprise. As a result, the addition of Rs. 5,15,05,000 to the returned income was deemed untenable and was deleted.

5. Interpretation of Legal Precedents:
The Tribunal referenced judgments such as M/s. Morgan Stanley & Co. Inc and SET Satellite Singapore Pte Ltd. to support its decision. It also cited the judgment of the Delhi High Court in the case of DIT vs BBC Worldwise Ltd., emphasizing that once a transaction is treated as arm's length in the hands of the recipient, no additional income should be attributed to the non-resident entity.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, ruling in favor of the appellant based on the application of transfer pricing principles and the arm's length price principle for commission payments, as supported by relevant legal precedents.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates