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 - 2022 (12) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2022 (12) TMI 175 - AT - Income Tax


Issues:
1. Whether the assessee could be held as 'assessee-in-default' for not deducting TDS on certain payments.

Analysis:
1. The appeal pertains to the Assessment Year 2014-15 and questions the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) dated 01-06-2017, regarding an order by the Assessing Officer under sections 201(1) and 1(A) of the Act on 28-06-2016. The primary issue revolves around the treatment of remittances made towards general training services as Fees for Technical Services (FTS).

2. The appellant contests the CIT(A)'s decision to treat them as 'assessee in default' under section 201 of the Act for remittances made to a non-resident entity, arguing that the payments were not taxable in India due to the absence of Permanent Establishment (PE) in India. The appellant asserts that the training provided, focusing on soft skills like leadership and general communication, does not qualify as technical services under the Act.

3. The Assessing Officer held that the services rendered were technical, necessitating TDS under section 195. The appellant, however, relied on the GE India Technology case, emphasizing that tax withholding is only applicable if the payment is taxable in India. The appellant argued that the training did not fall under managerial, technical, or consultancy services, citing precedents from Tribunal decisions.

4. The CIT(A) upheld the demand, deeming the services as 'fees for technical services' taxable under the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) and section 9(1)(vii) Explanation-2. The CIT(A) concluded that the acquired skills were technical and applicable to the employees' daily roles, justifying taxation under the DTAA and the Act.

5. The Tribunal found that the training aimed to enhance soft skills in leadership and general management, not specific to job functions, and did not involve technology transfer for future use. Referring to Article-12 of the DTAA, the Tribunal determined that the services did not fall under the criteria for 'fees for technical services,' as outlined in the agreement. Relying on a similar case from the Ahmedabad Tribunal, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, stating no obligation for TDS deduction existed. The appeal was allowed, and the demand was set aside.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates