Permanent establishment and royalty character upheld for hotel operations controlled through regular personnel presence and contractual oversight.

Regular personnel presence at the hotel premises in India, together with contractual control over strategic planning, operations, appointments, banking policy, marketing and purchasing, satisfied the fixed-place test under Article 5 of the India-UAE treaty, so the premises were held to be at the foreign enterprise's disposal as a permanent establishment. The Tribunal also treated the receipts from strategic oversight and consultancy as royalty because the arrangement included know-how, operational standards, strategic planning tools and related rights for use in the hotel business, making them taxable under section 9(1)(vi) and Article 12. Having found taxable presence and royalty character, it upheld computation of taxable profits under the domestic mechanism referred to section 44DA.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the assessee had a permanent establishment in India under Article 5 of the India-UAE tax treaty; (ii) whether the receipts from strategic oversight and consultancy services were taxable as royalty under section 9(1)(vi) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and Article 12 of the treaty; (iii) how the income attributable to the Indian operations was to be computed.

Issue (i): whether the assessee had a permanent establishment in India under Article 5 of the India-UAE tax treaty.

Analysis: The agreement and the surrounding facts showed that the assessee's personnel were regularly present at the hotel premises in India and that the premises were available for the assessee's business activities. The contractual terms gave the assessee substantial control over strategic planning, operations, appointments, bank account policies, marketing, purchasing and day-to-day oversight. On those facts, the fixed-place test was satisfied, and the duration and repetitiveness of the presence supported the conclusion that the place was at the assessee's disposal for carrying on business. The requirement under Article 5(2)(i) was also found to be met on the facts considered by the Tribunal.

Conclusion: The assessee had a permanent establishment in India and this issue was decided against the assessee.

Issue (ii): whether the receipts from strategic oversight and consultancy services were taxable as royalty under section 9(1)(vi) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and Article 12 of the treaty.

Analysis: The Tribunal treated the arrangement as extending beyond mere consultancy because the agreement also involved provision of know-how, operational standards, strategic planning tools and associated rights for use in the hotel business. On that basis, the receipts were held to fall within the royalty character adopted by the Revenue and to be taxable under Article 12.

Conclusion: The receipts were held taxable as royalty and this issue was decided against the assessee.

Issue (iii): how the income attributable to the Indian operations was to be computed.

Analysis: Having held that taxable presence existed in India and that the receipts were taxable, the Tribunal directed that the taxable profits be computed under the domestic law mechanism applicable to such income, with reference to section 44DA. The assessee's plea for a different profit attribution approach was not accepted in the final result.

Conclusion: The computation approach adopted by the Revenue was substantially upheld and this issue was decided against the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The Tribunal upheld the existence of a taxable presence in India, sustained taxability of the receipts, and rejected the assessee's appeals.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a foreign enterprise has contractual and factual control over hotel operations in India, regular personnel presence and effective use of the premises, the hotel premises can constitute a fixed-place permanent establishment and the resulting receipts may be taxed accordingly.

---