TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 148X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... greement with the submissions made by the ld. DR for the Revenue. AO has only followed the ruling of AAR in assessee s own case and as per the provisions of section 245S of the Act, ruling of Hon ble AAR is binding upon the Revenue authorities. Once it is clear that the Revenue authorities only followed the ruling of Hon ble AAR in assessee s own case, no fault can be found in their orders in appellate proceedings. No case has been made out that authorities below have not correctly followed the ruling of Hon ble AAR. It is also not a case that Hon ble High Court has reversed the order of Hon ble AAR. In this view of the matter, we do not find any infirmity in the order of ld. CIT (A), hence we uphold the same. This appeal filed by the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot in the nature of Royalty under the Act as well as Double Taxation A voidance Agreement between India and UK (hereinafter referred to as treaty ) by following the ruling of Hon'ble AAR in appellant's own case and ignoring the rulings of various Hon'ble High courts on similar issue including jurisdictional Hon'ble Delhi High Court and also ruling by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of A.P. Moller Maersk AS (2017) 392 ITR 186 holding that reimbursement of communication network charges is not taxable. 2.2. That the Ld. CIT(A) has also erred in facts and in law in holding that no appeal is maintainable on above ground as the matter has already been decided by AAR in appellant's own case, and while doing so has igno ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... her support services and software licenses to the member firms of the EY Network. The assessee is said to be established as a non-profit central service provider to enable EY member firms to share the costs of centralized services. Accordingly, the assessee enters into agreements with each member firm, pursuant to which it provides services required by member firms and thereafter, recovered various costs incurred by it from the member firms on actual usage basis. Given the above, the assessee filed a 'NIL' return of income on 30th March 2012 contending that the payments received by the assessee from Indian member firms are mere reimbursement of costs and not taxable under the Act as well as the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... application was admitted on 07.03.2013 as under:- 8. Questions raised before the AAR 1. Whether amounts received/receivable by EYGSL UK in accordance with the agreement entered into with EYGBS India Private Limited inter alia, on account of services and/or Deliverables as defined in the Agreement is chargeable to tax in India as fee for technical services under Article 13 of the Agreement for avoidance of Double Taxation between India and UK ('the India - UK Tax Treaty)? 2. Whether the amounts received by EYGSL UK from EYGBS India Pvt. Ltd. ('EYGBS India') as reimbursement of costs for giving the Right to benefit from the Deliverables and/or Services under the terms of the agreement would constitute income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... verables) is in the nature of royalty under Article 13 of India-UK DTAA as well as section 9(1)(vi) of the Act whereas consideration received for giving right to benefit from services is not in the nature of royalty under Article of India-UK DTAA. Q.4 In respect of Q.No.3, we have ruled that consideration for computer software is taxable as royalty. This is irrespective of the fact whether the applicant has a PE in India or not. Q.5 Consideration received in respect of giving right to benefit from computer software (deliverables) by the applicant would suffer withholding of tax under section 195 of the IT Act. 6. Thereafter, AO referred to the provisions of section 245S of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short the Act ) for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vance ruling. The provisions of section 158A are applicable only where the reference before Hon'ble High Court is under section 256 of the act. Moreover, as discussed above, I find that the act of filing appeal before CIT(A) itself is redundant because the matter has already been decided by Authority for advance ruling which is a higher appellate forum. The act of the appellant to file writ petition before Hon'ble High Court is sufficient to keep the matter alive. 8. Against this order, assessee is in appeal before us. 9. We have heard ld. DR for the Revenue and gone through the record. Nobody represented the assessee despite issuance of notice of hearing. Ld. DR for the Revenue submitted that the appeal is not at all maint ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
