Arm's length remuneration bars further profit attribution to an alleged permanent establishment and defeats section 234B interest

Where the Indian subsidiary's remuneration was accepted at arm's length, no further profits could be attributed to the foreign enterprise on the basis of an alleged permanent establishment in India; the addition was deleted. On the levy of interest under section 234B, the document states that once the attribution addition failed, the basis for charging interest fell away, and that advance-tax interest was not exigible where the income was subject to tax deduction at source. The penalty ground was treated as premature and was not examined on merits.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether any further profits could be attributed to the assessee's alleged permanent establishment in India once the remuneration to the Indian subsidiary was found to be at arm's length. (ii) Whether interest under section 234B was leviable in the facts of the case.

Issue (i): Whether any further profits could be attributed to the assessee's alleged permanent establishment in India once the remuneration to the Indian subsidiary was found to be at arm's length.

Analysis: The assessee confined its challenge to the attribution made by the Assessing Officer. The arrangement with the Indian subsidiary provided for sharing of the customer receipts on a 50:50 basis, and the transfer pricing order in the subsidiary's case had accepted the transaction at arm's length. Applying the principles recognised in Morgan Stanley and E-Funds, the existence of an arm's length remuneration for the Indian entity meant that no further profits could be attributed to the foreign assessee merely on the footing of an alleged permanent establishment in India.

Conclusion: No further income was attributable to the assessee in India on account of the alleged permanent establishment, and the addition was deleted.

Issue (ii): Whether interest under section 234B was leviable in the facts of the case.

Analysis: Once the addition stood deleted, the basis for levy of interest was substantially neutralised. Independently, where the income is subject to deduction of tax at source, interest for default in payment of advance tax is not exigible.

Conclusion: Interest under section 234B was not leviable.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded on the core attribution issue and on the levy of interest, while the penalty ground was treated as premature and not adjudicated on merits.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the Indian affiliate's compensation is accepted at arm's length, no additional profits can be attributed to the foreign enterprise's alleged permanent establishment in India; correspondingly, advance-tax interest is not leviable where the income is subject to tax deduction at source.

---