ACIT vs. Veer Gems (ITAT Ahmedabad)
S. 92A Transfer
Pricing: Important law explained on meaning of expression "associated
enterprise". The mere fact that an enterprise has de facto participation
in the capital, management or control over the other enterprise does not make
the two enterprises "associated enterprises" so as to subject their
transactions to the rigors of transfer pricing lawIf a form of participation in management, capital or control is not recognized by Section 92A(2), even if it ends up in de facto or even de jure participation in management, capital or control by one of the enterprise in the other enterprise, it does not result in the related enterprises being treated as ‘associated enterprises’. Section 92A(1) and (2), in that sense, are required to be read together, even though Section 92A(2) does provide several deeming fictions which prima facie stretch the basic rule in Section 92A(1) quite considerably on the basis of, what appears to be, manner of participation in “control” of the other enterprise. What is thus clear that as long as the provisions of one of the clauses in Section 92A(2) are not satisfied, even if an enterprise has a de facto participation capital, management or control over the other enterprises, the two enterprises cannot be said to be associated enterprises
Quick Flight Limited vs. ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad)
S. 206AA: In case
where payments have been made to deductees on the strength of the beneficial
provisions of s. 115A(1)(b) of the Act or as per DTAA rates r.w.s. 90(2) of the
Act, the provisions of s. 206AA cannot be invoked by the AO insisting to deduct
tax @ 20% for non-availability of PAN It is only elementary that, under the scheme of the Income Tax Act 1961- as set out under section 90(2) of the Act, the provisions of the applicable tax treaties override the provisions of the Income Tax Act 1961- except when the provisions of the Act are more beneficial to the assessee. The provisions of the applicable tax treaty, in the present case, prescribe the tax rate @ 10%. This rate of 10% is applicable on the related income whether or not the assessee has obtained the permanent account number. In effect, therefore, even when a foreign entity does not obtain PAN in India, the applicable tax rate is 10% in this case. Section 206AA, which provides a higher tax burden- i.e. taxability @ 20% in the event of foreign entity not obtaining the permanent account number in India, therefore, cannot be pressed into service, as has been done in the course of processing of return under section 200A. To that extent, short deduction of tax at source demand, raised in the course of processing of TDS return under section 200A, is unsustainable in law
No comments:
Post a Comment