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 - 2014 (12) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2014 (12) TMI 128 - AT - Income Tax


Issues Involved:
1. Treating new license fee agreements as extensions of old license fee agreements and thereby taxing license fee at a higher rate of 15%.
2. Rejection of additional evidence filed before the learned Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP).

Detailed Analysis:

Issue 1: Treating New License Fee Agreements as Extensions of Old License Fee Agreements

Facts and Circumstances:
The assessee, a company incorporated in the United Kingdom, entered into new license fee agreements with its Indian associates, M/s. GKN Sinter Metals Ltd. and M/s. GKN Driveline (India) Ltd., effective from January 1, 2007. The assessee argued that these new agreements should be taxed at a lower rate of 10% under section 115A(1)(b)(AA) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. However, the Assessing Officer and the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) treated these agreements as extensions of old agreements dated 2003 and 2004, thereby taxing the license fee at a higher rate of 15% as per Article 13(2)(a)(ii) of the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) between India and the United Kingdom.

Assessing Officer's Stand:
The Assessing Officer found no significant difference between the old agreements and the new agreements except for the change in the royalty rate. The officer concluded that the new agreements were executed to circumvent the provisions of the Income-tax Act and to take advantage of the lower tax rate.

DRP's Observations:
The DRP noted that the old agreements with other group affiliates were not produced before the Assessing Officer and were presented for the first time before the DRP. The DRP found no significant changes in the new agreements except for the royalty rate and rejected the additional evidence provided by the assessee.

Tribunal's Analysis:
The Tribunal found that the new agreements were independent and not mere extensions of the old agreements. The Tribunal held that the Revenue authorities cannot interfere with the business decisions of the assessee unless it is proven that the new agreements are a colorable device. The Tribunal concluded that the new license fee agreements should be taxed at the lower rate of 10%.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal directed that the new license fee agreements entered into by the assessee with GKN Sinter Metals Ltd. and GKN Driveline (India) Ltd. be treated as new and separate agreements, and the license fee income should be taxed at the rate of 10%.

Issue 2: Rejection of Additional Evidence Filed Before the DRP

Facts and Circumstances:
The assessee produced additional evidence in the form of old license fee agreements with other GKN group entities before the DRP. The DRP rejected this additional evidence, stating that it was presented for the first time during the DRP proceedings and was not produced before the Assessing Officer.

Tribunal's Analysis:
The Tribunal noted that the additional evidence was relevant to the conclusions arrived at by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal observed that the Revenue authorities should not have rejected the additional evidence without giving the assessee an opportunity to present it.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal implicitly accepted the relevance of the additional evidence by treating the new agreements as independent and directed the lower authorities to tax the license fee income at the lower rate of 10%.

Final Judgment:
The appeal filed by the assessee was allowed, and the Tribunal directed that the new license fee agreements be treated as new and separate agreements, thereby taxing the license fee income at the rate of 10%. The Tribunal also implicitly recognized the relevance of the additional evidence provided by the assessee. The judgment was pronounced in the open court on August 28, 2014.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates