Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        Note

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>General Business Support Services payments not taxable as Fees for Technical Services under Income Tax Act</h1> <h3>M/s. Shell International Petroleum Company Limited Versus Dy. Director of Income Tax (International Taxation) -2 (1), Mumbai</h3> M/s. Shell International Petroleum Company Limited Versus Dy. Director of Income Tax (International Taxation) -2 (1), Mumbai - TMI ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDEREDThe core legal issues considered in this judgment include:Whether the payments received by the assessee for General Business Support Services (BSS) constitute 'income' in the nature of 'Fees for Technical Services' (FTS) liable to be taxed in India under the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the India-UK Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA).Whether the receipts from General BSS are in the nature of cost-recharge and thus not chargeable to tax in India.Whether the services provided by the assessee 'make available' technical knowledge, skill, experience, etc., to the service recipient under Article 12 of the India-UK DTAA, thereby subjecting them to tax in India.The initiation of penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act.Whether the assessment order is barred by limitation.Whether the existence of a 'permanent establishment' under Article 7 of the DTAA was properly considered.ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS1. Payments as 'Fees for Technical Services' (FTS)Relevant legal framework and precedents: The determination of whether payments constitute FTS is guided by the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the India-UK DTAA. Article 13 of the DTAA defines 'fees for technical services' and outlines the tax implications.Court's interpretation and reasoning: The Tribunal relied on the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court's decision, which quashed the Authority for Advance Ruling's (AAR) order that categorized the payments as FTS. The High Court clarified that the services provided were managerial, not technical, and did not 'make available' technical knowledge.Key evidence and findings: The Tribunal noted the High Court's analysis of the Cost Contribution Agreement (CCA) and the nature of services listed, which were managerial and not technical.Application of law to facts: The Tribunal applied the High Court's ruling that the services were not technical and thus not taxable as FTS under the DTAA.Treatment of competing arguments: The Departmental Representative acknowledged the High Court's decision favoring the assessee, while the assessee's representative highlighted the High Court's reversal of the AAR's ruling.Conclusions: The Tribunal concluded that the payments were not taxable as FTS, aligning with the High Court's decision.2. Nature of Receipts as Cost-RechargeRelevant legal framework and precedents: The characterization of receipts as cost-recharge involves understanding whether they constitute income under section 2(24) of the Income Tax Act.Court's interpretation and reasoning: The Tribunal accepted the assessee's contention that the payments were cost-recharges without markup, thus not constituting income.Key evidence and findings: The Tribunal considered the CCA terms, which specified cost allocation without markup.Application of law to facts: The Tribunal found that the payments were reimbursements, not income, and thus not taxable.Treatment of competing arguments: The Tribunal noted the Departmental Representative's agreement with the High Court's ruling.Conclusions: The Tribunal held that the payments were not income and thus not taxable.3. 'Make Available' Clause under DTAARelevant legal framework and precedents: The 'make available' clause in Article 13 of the DTAA determines whether services provided impart technical knowledge enabling independent use by the recipient.Court's interpretation and reasoning: The Tribunal followed the High Court's interpretation that the services did not 'make available' technical knowledge.Key evidence and findings: The Tribunal cited the High Court's analysis of the CCA, which listed managerial services not meeting the 'make available' criteria.Application of law to facts: The Tribunal applied the High Court's reasoning, concluding the services did not meet the 'make available' test.Treatment of competing arguments: The Tribunal acknowledged the Departmental Representative's concession on this point.Conclusions: The Tribunal concluded that the services did not 'make available' technical knowledge and were not taxable under the DTAA.4. Penalty Proceedings under Section 271(1)(c)The Tribunal did not specifically address this issue in detail, as the primary focus was on the taxability of the payments as FTS.5. Assessment Order Barred by LimitationThe additional ground regarding limitation was not pressed by the assessee and thus not adjudicated by the Tribunal.6. Permanent Establishment under Article 7 of DTAARelevant legal framework and precedents: The existence of a permanent establishment affects tax liability under Article 7 of the DTAA.Court's interpretation and reasoning: The Tribunal noted that the issue of permanent establishment was not raised by either party in the appeal and declined to adjudicate on it.Key evidence and findings: The Tribunal referenced the High Court's direction allowing the Department to explore this issue separately.Application of law to facts: The Tribunal did not apply the law to this issue due to its absence in the grounds of appeal.Treatment of competing arguments: The Tribunal acknowledged the Departmental Representative's suggestion but adhered to the principle of adjudicating only on raised issues.Conclusions: The Tribunal did not address the permanent establishment issue, leaving it open for separate proceedings.SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGSThe Tribunal's significant holdings include:The payments received for General BSS are not 'fees for technical services' under the Income Tax Act or the India-UK DTAA, as they do not 'make available' technical knowledge.The receipts are in the nature of cost-recharge and do not constitute income chargeable to tax in India.The Tribunal allowed the appeal, reversing the lower authorities' reliance on the AAR's ruling, which was quashed by the High Court.The Tribunal declined to adjudicate on the permanent establishment issue, as it was not part of the grounds of appeal.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found