Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the centralized services fee received by the assessee under the India-US DTAA was taxable as fees for included services or fees for technical services, or whether it constituted business income not chargeable to tax in India in the absence of a permanent establishment.
Analysis: The services were found to form part of an integrated business arrangement directed principally toward advertising, publicity, marketing, sales promotion and reservations for the hotel business. The arrangement was held not to satisfy the requirements of fees for included services, since the services were neither ancillary nor subsidiary to the license arrangement in the manner required by Article 12(4)(a), and the make available condition relevant to technical services was also not met. The fee was treated as consideration for business operations rather than as royalty or technical services income, and the binding earlier decisions in the assessee's own case and the group concern's case were followed.
Conclusion: The centralized services fee was not taxable as fees for included services or fees for technical services under the DTAA or section 9 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, but was business income; in the absence of a permanent establishment in India, it was not taxable.