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 - 2023 (3) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2023 (3) TMI 198 - AT - Income Tax


Issues Involved:
1. Addition of marketing receipts, frequent guest program receipts, general advertising, coordination fund contribution, and reservation fees as Fee For Technical Services (FTS) under Article 12 of the India-Singapore DTAA and Section 9(1)(vii) of the Income-Tax Act.
2. Taxability of reimbursement of expenses as FTS under the provisions of the Act and India-Singapore DTAA.
3. Short grant of TDS for assessment year 2019-20.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Addition of Marketing Receipts and Other Fees as FTS:
The primary issue in the appeals was whether the marketing receipts, frequent guest program receipts, general advertising, coordination fund contribution, and reservation fees should be classified as Fee For Technical Services (FTS) under Article 12 of the India-Singapore DTAA and Section 9(1)(vii) of the Income-Tax Act. The assessee, a non-resident corporate entity from Singapore, argued that these receipts were business receipts not taxable in India due to the absence of a Permanent Establishment (PE) in India. The Assessing Officer (AO) disagreed, treating these receipts as FTS, arguing they were ancillary to the trademark license agreement and thus taxable under Article 12(4)(a) of the DTAA.

The Tribunal examined the nature of the receipts and services provided, concluding that the marketing and reservation activities were distinct from the license fee and did not qualify as FTS under Article 12(4)(a) or 12(4)(b) of the DTAA. The Tribunal referenced the case of Sheraton International Inc., where similar services were deemed not to constitute FTS. The Tribunal emphasized that the services did not make available technical knowledge, experience, skill, or know-how, which is a requirement under Article 12(4)(b).

The Tribunal also rejected the AO's argument that the centralized services agreement was ancillary to the license agreement. They concluded that the predominant purpose of the centralized services was to provide advertisement, marketing, and promotion of the hotel business, which was not ancillary to the license agreement. The Tribunal directed the AO to delete the addition, reaffirming that the receipts were business income not taxable in India due to the absence of a PE.

2. Taxability of Reimbursement of Expenses as FTS:
The second issue involved the taxability of reimbursement of expenses as FTS. The AO treated these reimbursements as FTS due to the lack of detailed breakup and supporting documents. The Tribunal found that the reimbursements were for routine services like courier charges, media monitoring, email campaigns, and translation services, which did not involve technical or strategic expertise. These services were neither ancillary to royalty nor did they make available technical knowledge or skill. The Tribunal directed the AO to delete the additions, concluding that the reimbursements could not be treated as FTS under Article 12(4) of the DTAA.

3. Short Grant of TDS for Assessment Year 2019-20:
The final issue was the short grant of TDS for the assessment year 2019-20. The Tribunal directed the AO to verify the assessee's claim and allow the credit of TDS in accordance with the law.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee on all major issues, directing the AO to delete the additions related to marketing receipts and reimbursements, and to verify and grant the correct TDS credit for the assessment year 2019-20. The Tribunal's decisions were heavily influenced by precedents, particularly the case of Sheraton International Inc., and the interpretation of the DTAA provisions.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates