Treaty protection for shipping income covers ERP cost recoveries and inland haulage linked to international shipping operations.

Cost reimbursements for an integrated SAP-based ERP system used in global shipping operations were treated as part of income from operations of ships in international traffic, because the receipts were on a cost-to-cost basis, without markup, and did not involve independent managerial, technical, or consultancy services; they were therefore not taxable as royalty or fees for technical services. Inland haulage charges were also held to be intrinsically connected with international shipping, as an ancillary part of container and cargo movement, so the treaty protection for shipping income prevailed over domestic charging provisions and the amounts were not separately taxable in India.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the amounts recovered towards the SAP based ERP system and IT/procurement costs were taxable as royalty or fees for technical services, or were part of income from operations of ships in international traffic under the applicable treaty. (ii) Whether income from inland haulage charges was covered by the treaty as income from operations of ships in international traffic and therefore outside the Indian tax net, with section 44B and section 9(1)(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 not applying.

Issue (i): Whether the amounts recovered towards the SAP based ERP system and IT/procurement costs were taxable as royalty or fees for technical services, or were part of income from operations of ships in international traffic under the applicable treaty.

Analysis: The recovery was found to be a cost allocation for use and maintenance of an integral software system used to conduct global shipping operations more efficiently. The receipts were on a cost-to-cost basis without markup and did not involve independent managerial, technical, or consultancy services. The system facilitated shipping operations and was inseparable from the business of operating ships in international traffic. Domestic law amendments could not override the treaty position where the treaty was more beneficial.

Conclusion: The recovery was not taxable as royalty or fees for technical services and was to be treated as part of income from operations of ships in international traffic. The finding was in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether income from inland haulage charges was covered by the treaty as income from operations of ships in international traffic and therefore outside the Indian tax net, with section 44B and section 9(1)(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 not applying.

Analysis: Inland haulage charges were held to be directly connected with the transport of containers and cargo movement in the course of international shipping. The activity was not a separate business but an integral and ancillary part of the shipping operation, with no separate commercial or taxable character independent of the treaty article governing shipping income. The treaty therefore prevailed over domestic charging provisions.

Conclusion: Inland haulage charges were covered by the treaty and were not separately taxable in India under section 44B or section 9(1)(i). The finding was in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The revenue's challenge failed on both substantive issues, and the DRP's directions were sustained.

Ratio Decidendi: Where receipts are merely reimbursement of costs for facilities or systems integral to shipping operations, and inland transport/haulage is intrinsically connected with international shipping, such receipts fall within the treaty protection for operations of ships in international traffic and cannot be separately taxed as royalty, fees for technical services, or independent business income under domestic provisions.

---