AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (11) TMI 1194
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... specific adjudication. 4. Ground Nos. 3 and 4 raised by the assessee were stated to be not pressed by the ld AR for which a separate letter dated 05.11.2024 has been filed on behalf of the assessee. Accordingly, these two grounds are hereby dismissed as not pressed. 5. Ground Nos. 4 and 5 raised by the assessee are with regard to taxability of Rs. 12,78,69,526/- received towards repairs and maintenance services rendered by the assessee. 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. Assessee is a company established under the laws of Singapore and is engaged in providing repair and maintenance services of aircraft equipment to Indian customers. For the captioned year, the assessee filed its return of income on 13 January 2021 declaring total income as NIL. The assessee claimed credit of the entire taxes deducted at source ('TDS') of Rs. 76,08,630/- as refund during the subject year. During the year under consideration, the Assessee has earned following receipts from Indian customers:- Nature of Income Amount (in Rs. ) Taxability Comments Repair services for aircraft equipment 12,78,69,526 Non-taxable under....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....es are in the nature of "technical and consultancy services" since the solution provided by the assessee through a automated process by using of data provided by the customers involved special knowledge. The assessee raised an objection that services are rendered outside India. The ld AO buttressed this argument of the assessee by observing that place of rendition of service is not important as long as the services are utilized for a business or profession carried on in India. The ld AO also observed that income of the recipients would be chargeable to tax in the country where the source of payment is located i.e. where the buyer is located. In support of this proposition, he relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of GVK Industries reported in 332 ITR 130 (SC). The ld AO also observed that the repairs and maintenance services were made available to the Indian customers so that they can use it independently without the support of the assessee. The equipments/ parts are essential parts of an aircraft and due to lack of technical expertise in India, the equipments are sent to Singapore for technical repair and maintenance. Once the parts are sent back to c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....) in India. Hence, the payment received towards repairs and maintenance of aircraft would fall at best under the category of works contract constituting business receipts and in absence of PE in India, the same would not be taxable even as per the India- Singapore Treaty. In support of this proposition, the assessee relied on the decision of the Mumbai Tribunal in the case of DHL Air Ltd Vs. DCIT reported in 86 taxmann.com 277 (Mum Trib) wherein, it was held that services for repairs and maintenance of aircraft cannot be termed as technical services as defined in section 9(1)(vii) of the Act and rather it falls under the category of works contract as per section 194C of the Act which fact is also clarified by CBDT in its Circular No. 715 dated 08.08.1995 vide Question No. 29. Further, the assessee also submitted that co-ordinate bench of Delhi Tribunal in the case of Parasrampuria Synthetics Ltd reported 20 SOT 248 (Del Trib) held that use of services of technically qualified persons to render the services did not bring the amount paid as "fee for technical services" within the meaning of Explanation 2 to Section 9(1)(vii) of the Act. Similar decision was rendered by Delhi Tribunal....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the assessee does not have any PE in India. These facts are very clear from the sample Dispatch plus Product Service Agreement entered into by the assessee with Inter Globe Aviation Pvt. Ltd which is enclosed in pages 211 to 248 of the Paper Book. The copies of the invoices raised by the assessee are enclosed in pages 261 to 264 of the Paper Book. 11. The ld DR before us vehemently pleaded that the ld AO had applied "source rule" in the instant case. She doubted the fact as to whether services per se were rendered in Singapore by the assessee. She stated that services of Airbus are rendered in France which is in public knowledge. We find that this argument to be completely absurd and devoid of merit in view of the fact that no consideration was received by the assessee from Airbus. Further, this was not even the case of the ld AO for treating the receipts as FTS in the hands of the assessee. We further find that the issue in dispute is squarely covered by the co-ordinate bench decision of the Delhi Tribunal in the case of Goodrich Corporation Vs. ACIT in ITA No. 988/Del/2024 for AY 2018-19 dated 22.08.2024 which is a sister concern of the assessee, wherein, exactly the identica....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... items mentioned in it for example the enduring benefit of a technical design or know-how cannot be same as enduring benefit coming from imparting of skill or experience. In the former case enduring benefit will outlive the enduring benefit brought in by the latter. In case of assessee company, the enduring benefit and make available fall under skill/experience which is shared by assessee company with its customers. Both the parties in these service transactions are engaged in highly specialized work which can be rendered and avalled by them only and once the skill/experience is rendered, it continues to give benefit until required again. When it comes to services rendered as skill and experience, the make available and enduring benefit, will almost always have a comparatively short shelf life in this context. This being the case, it cannot be ignored that the make available clause and enduring benefits are satisfied and the service is not of the nature which is so highly technical and specialized that it should be taxed as Fee for Technical Services." 6. From the above, we find that it could be technical services but the 'make available' clause is totally absent. ....