JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No. 31543 of 2011:
This is a petition under Article 136 of the Constitution of India
seeking special leave to appeal against the order dated 08.08.2011 of the
Authority for Advance Rulings (Income Tax) constituted under Chapter XIX-B
of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') in A.A.R. No.862 of 2009.
(2.) The petitioner is a company incorporated in the United States of
America (for short 'the USA') and is engaged in the business of designing,
developing, marketing and distributing outdoor apparel. For making
purchases for its business, the petitioner established a liaison office in
Chennai with the permission of the Reserve Bank of India (for short 'the
RBI') in 1995. The RBI granted the permission in its letter dated
01.03.1995 subject to the conditions stipulated therein. The permission
letter dated 01.03.1995 of the RBI stated that the liaison office of the
petitioner was for the purpose of undertaking purely liaison activities
viz. to inspect the quality, to ensure shipments and to act as a
communication channel between head office and parties in India and except
such liaison work, the liaison office will not undertake any other activity
of a trading, commercial or industrial nature nor shall it enter into any
business contracts in its own name without the prior permission of the RBI.
The petitioner also obtained permission on 19.06.2000 from the RBI for
opening an additional liaison office in Bangalore on the same terms and
conditions as mentioned in the letter dated 01.03.1995 of the RBI.
(3.) On 10.12.2009, the petitioner filed an application before the
Authority for Advance Rulings (for short 'the Authority') on the questions
relating to its transactions in its liaison office in India set out in
Annexure-II to the application. Questions No. 1 to 6 as set out in
Annexure-II to the application of the petitioner before the Authority are
extracted hereinbelow:
"1. Whether based on the nature of activities carried on by the
Liaison Office ['India LO'] of the Applicant in India, as listed
in the Statement of relevant facts [Annexure III], any income
accrues or arises in India as per Section 5(2)9B) of the Act
2. Whether based on the nature of activities carried on by the
India LO, as listed in the Statement of relevant facts [Annexure
III], the Applicant can be said to have a business connection in
India as per the provisions of Section 9(1)(i) of Act read with
its Explanation 2
3. If the answer to Query 2 is in the affirmative, whether
various activities carried out by the India LO, as listed in the
Statement of relevant facts [Annexure III], are covered under
the phrase 'through or from operations which are confined to the
purchase of goods in India for the purpose of export' as stated
in part (b) of Explanation 1 to Section 9(1)(i) of the Act
4. If the answer to Query 3 is in the negative, how would the
profits attributable to the 'operations in India' be determined
and what would be the broad principles to be borne in mind for
attributing income to the India LO
5. Whether the India LO creates a permanent establishment ['PE']
for the Applicant in India under Article 5(1) of the Agreement
for Avoidance of Double Taxation and Prevention of Fiscal
Evasion with respect to Taxes on Income and Capital Gains
entered into between the Government of the Republic of India and
the Government of the United States of America ['Treaty'] read
with the PE exclusion available for purchase function in terms
of paragraph 3(d) of Article 5 of the Treaty
6. If the answer to Query 5 is in the affirmative, how would the
profits attributable to the PE in India be determined and what
would be the broad principles to be borne in mind for
attributing income to India LO under the Treaty '
;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.