Singapore entity's loyalty program and service fees not taxable as royalty under India-Singapore DTAA Article 12(3)

The ITAT Delhi held that receipts from loyalty programs, marketing, reservation services, and blackberry services by a Singapore-incorporated non-resident entity cannot be treated as royalty under Article 12(3) of the India-Singapore DTAA. The tribunal distinguished these service fees from brand name/trademark usage fees, finding they involved pure service rendition without transfer of copyrights, designs, or industrial knowledge. Following precedent from Sheraton International Inc. and Starwood Hotels cases, the tribunal classified the receipts as business income. Since no permanent establishment existed in India, the income was held non-taxable, and the assessee's appeal was allowed.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Taxability of Rs. 11,27,56,000 as royalty income under the Income-Tax Act and the India-Singapore DTAA.
2. Taxability of Rs. 64,548 as business fee for technical services (FTS).

Summary of Judgment:

1. Taxability of Rs. 11,27,56,000 as Royalty Income:

The assessee, a non-resident corporate entity incorporated in Singapore, entered into franchise agreements to sublicense brand names and other IPRs to group entities in India. The core issue was whether the income received from these activities should be taxed as royalty under the Income-Tax Act and the India-Singapore DTAA. The assessee had declared this income as royalty in its return. However, the Assessing Officer issued a show cause notice arguing that the receipts from loyalty programs, reservation fees, marketing fees, and blackberry services should also be treated as royalty. The assessee contended that these receipts were neither royalty nor FTS but business income. The Assessing Officer, supported by the DRP, treated these receipts as royalty, leading to the final assessment order.

2. Taxability of Rs. 64,548 as Business Fee for Technical Services (FTS):

The subsidiary issue involved the taxability of Rs. 64,548 received as a business fee for technical services. The assessee argued that the services provided were not managerial, technical, or consultancy services and thus should not be treated as FTS.

Detailed Judgment:

Nature of Services Rendered:

The Tribunal examined the nature of services provided by the assessee, which included loyalty programs, central reservation services, marketing services, and blackberry services. These services were provided from outside India, with no employees of the assessee visiting India. The Tribunal noted that these services were distinct from the license fee charged under the franchise agreement and were aimed at enhancing geographical coverage and visibility among prospective customers.

Royalty vs. Business Income:

The Tribunal held that the services rendered were not ancillary and subsidiary to the use of the brand name or trademark. The receipts from loyalty programs, marketing, reservation services, and blackberry services were for certain services and not for the use of any copyright, trademark, or industrial, commercial, or scientific experience. Therefore, these receipts could not be treated as royalty under Article 12(3) of the India-Singapore DTAA.

Precedents and Judicial Decisions:

The Tribunal relied on several judicial precedents, including decisions in cases like DIT vs. Sheraton International Inc. and Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide Inc., which held that similar receipts were neither in the nature of royalty nor FTS. The Tribunal noted that the services provided were for facilitating the sale and promotional operations and not for facilitating the application of the brand license.

Conclusion:

The Tribunal concluded that the receipts from loyalty programs, marketing, reservation services, and blackberry services could not be treated as royalty or FTS. These receipts were business income, and in the absence of a Permanent Establishment (PE) in India, they were not taxable in India. The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to delete the addition.

Result:
The appeal was allowed, and the addition was deleted.

---