economic growth slows to 6.9 per cent   Amarchand Mangaldas to open offices in Chennai Ahmedabad & Pune    US closes its embassy in Syria    Sudha Sharma appointed as Member of CBDT    Rupee hits a high of 48.73 against Dollar   Laxman Das is Officiating Chairman of CBDT    Tariff Value for import of gold is 556 & for silver 1067 & for Brass Scrap 4078 & for poppy seeds 2205-Customs Non-Tariff Notification No. 10   Fused Silica is classifiable under Tariff Item 32074000-Customs Circular No.3    Additional Commisssioner of Income Tax HA Siddiqui sentenced to 4 years imprisonment for accepting bribe of Rs 1 Lakh by CBI Court in Delhi    HC upholds levy of service tax on booking of flats-The explanation which was inserted by the Finance Act of   2010 clearly brings within the fold of taxable service a construction  service provided by the builder to a buyer where there is an intended sale  between the parties whether before, during or after construction    Authority for Advance Ruling rules super concentrates shall be classified as products of the chemical industry under heading 3824 90 90 of Customs Tariff      Anti dumping duty imposed on import of Morpholine from China European Union & USA     Anti dumping duty imposed on import of  Geogrid/Geostrips/ Geostraps made of polyester or Glass fiber in all its forms from      Refund of Anti­-Dumping Duty (Paid in Excess of Actual Margin of Dumping) Rules, 2012 notified-Customs Non-Tariff Notification No.5     Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of Anti-dumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Amendment Rules, 2012-Customs Non-Tariff Notification No.6     Safeguard duty at the rate of 10% ad  valorem notified on import of Phthalic anhydride, falling under tariff item 2917 35 00-Customs SG Notification No.1     Customs duty on import of Gold, Silver, Cut & Polished Diamonds hiked    Customs duty to be charged at the rate of 2 per cent of Tariff Value on gold and 6 per cent of Tariff Value on silver     Tariff Value for import of gold & silver notified-Customs Non-Tariff Notification No.3     Anti-dumping duty on imports ofSilk fabrics 20-100 gms per metre, falling under heading 5007  originating in, or exported from, China-CustomsTariff Notification No. 2     Anti-dumping duty imposed on imports of Nylon Filament Yarn, falling under Chapter 54 ,originating in, or exported from,  China, Chinese Taipei, Malaysia, Thailand and Korea RP-Customs TariffNotification No.3   Anti-dumping duty imposed on import of Phosphoric Acid of allgrades and all concentrations (excluding Agriculture/Fertilizer Grade) ,falling under tariff item 28092010, originating in, or exported from, Israel and Taiwan-Customs Tariff Notification No.4    Anti-dumping duty on imports of Cellophane Transparent Film , falling under Chapter 39 , originating in, or exported from, China-Customs TariffNotification No.5    Anti-dumping duty onimports of Saccharin, falling under Chapters 29, 30, 33 and 38 ,originating in, or exported from, China-Customs Tariff Notification No.7    Special Bench of ITAT rules the appellant is not entitled to set off carry forward business loss against the long term capital gain arising on sale of land used for the purpose business    ITAT rules Long Term and Short Term gains / losses on sale of equity shares under Portfolio Management Scheme is business income  and not Capital Gains   HC rules the opinion of the AO may have been legally erroneous but this cannot be a ground for initiation of re-assessment proceedings      Anti-dumping duty on ‘Caustic Soda’,  originating in, or exported from, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Japan, USA & France-Customs Tariff Notification No.1    Cost Accountants can issue Certificates for the purpose of refund of 4% CVD-Customs Circular No.1     Customs duty on import from ASEAN nations lowered- Customs Tariff Notification No.127     deeper tariff cut on import from Malaysia notified- Customs Tariff Notification No.128   deeper tariff cuts on import from Korea notified- Customs Tariff Notification No.123  deeper tariff cuts on import from Srilanka & Pakistan under SAFTA notified- Customs Tariff Notification No.125      Schedule of Rates for Service Tax Refund to Exporters notified in supersession of Notification No.17/2009-Service Tax Notification No. 52      Customs duty on import of several products from specified countries lowered-Customs Tariff Notification No.113      Anti-dumping duty on ‘Sodium Hydrosulphite (SHS)’, falling under headings 2831 and 2832 , originating in, or exported from, China PR- Customs Tariff Notification No.111     CBEC specifies documents required for Registration of ServiceTax     Customs duty on import of 532 Products from Singapore lowered-many products exempted from duty-Customs Tariff Notification No. 106     Government allows Rebate of excise duty on export of goods to Nepal under ARE-1 Procedure w.e.f. 1st March 2012-Central Excise Non-Tariff Notification No.24

Services  |  Subscribe  |  Contact Us  |   Feedback   |  E-mail  |  News |  Home
JUDGMENTS
CENTRAL EXCISE
CUSTOMS
SERVICE TAX
INCOME TAX
VAT
FINANCE ACTS
FINANCE BILLS
EOU STPI
SEZ
DGFT
RBI
NTT
RESOURCES


    
Email | Print

Referral fee received by Cushman & Wakefield (S) Pte Ltd not taxable in India

AIT News Network

NEW DELHI. Authority for Advance Rulings(Income Tax) vide a significant ruling AIT-2008-216-AAR has ruled that the referral fee received by Cushman & Wakefield, (S) Pte. Ltd. from Cushman & Wakefield India Pvt. Ltd., in terms of the referral agreement dated January 1, 2005 would not be taxable in India having regard to the provisions of the Income Tax Act and the provisions of the DTAA between India and Singapore either under the head business income, or royalty income or income by way of FTS.

Further, the referral fee received by Cushman & Wakefield(S) Pte. Ltd., from Cushman & Wakefield India Pvt. Ltd. in terms of the referral agreement dated January 1, 2005 is not liable for deduction of tax at source in the hands of the payer.

The applicant does not have a ‘business connection’ in India under the provisions of the Act.

The applicant does not have a Permanent Establishment in India in having regard to the provisions of the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between India and Singapore by virtue of its agreement with Cushman & Wakefield India Pvt. Ltd.

The applicant, a foreign company incorporated and based in Singapore, offers a full range of real estate services to its local and international clients.  Cushman & Wakefield India Pvt. Ltd.(in short, CWI) is, a wholly owned subsidiary of Cushman & Wakefield Mauritius, which, in turn, is a subsidiary of Cushman & Wakefield, Asia. The applicant is, as per averment, engaged in the business of rendering services in connection with acquisition, sales and dealings in real estate and other services such as advisory & research facilities management, project management etc. in the field of real estate. The applicant states that it has also developed certain international client relationships and in accordance with the global policy, various offices provide referral services to other Cushman and Wakefield (C&W) offices, wherein one C&W Office would refer client to other C&W office, depending on the requirements of the clients. In respect of such referrals, as per the applicant, each serving C&W Company is liable to pay a ‘referral fee’ to referring group company in accordance with the international fees sharing rules of C&W group. In consonance with this very general policy, the applicant entered into an agreement dated 1st January, 2005 with CWI, as per which, the applicant CWS shall refer/recommend the potential customers, desirous of obtaining real estate consultancy and associated services in India, to CWI.  As per the terms of the agreement, CWI will pay the applicant a percentage of amount charged by the applicant (CWS) on the referred customers as referral commission after it (CWI) has realized in full the amount from the customers. Further, withholding of tax on the referral commission paid, has to be deducted by CWI. As mentioned in the statement of facts, the applicant is neither involved in persuading the customers to avail services of CWI, nor in negotiating or collecting fees charged by CWI from the customers referred to by CWS. It has further been stated that they (CWS) simply refer the potential customers for real estate transactions and give some details (locations etc.) about the property in question.

The applicant sought rulings from the Authority on the following questions :-

i.          Whether the referral fee received by Cushman & Wakefield, (S) Pte. Ltd. (the applicant) from Cushman & Wakefield India Pvt. Ltd., in terms of the referral agreement dated January 1, 2005 is liable to be taxed in India in accordance with the provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) read with Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between India and Singapore?

ii.         Whether the referral fee received by Cushman & Wakefield(S) Pte. Ltd., from Cushman & Wakefield India Pvt. Ltd. in terms of the referral agreement dated January 1, 2005 is liable for deduction of tax at source in the hands of the payer?

iii.        Whether the applicant can be said to have a business connection in India under the provisions of section 9(1)(i) of the Indian Income-tax Act (‘Act’) by virtue of its agreement with Cushman & Wakefield India Pvt. Ltd.?

iv.         If the answer to question (iii) above is in the affirmative, whether the whole or any part (if yes what proportion) of referral fee could be attributed to India in terms of explanation to Section 9(1)(i) of the Act and would constitute income accruing or arising in India?

v.          If the referral fee is held to be taxable, whether the same can be classified as Royalty under section 9(1)(vi), fee for technical services under section 9(1)(vii), or “income from business or profession” under the Act read with the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between India and Singapore and what is the rate of tax applicable?

vi.         Whether the applicant can be said to have a Permanent Establishment in India in having regard to the provisions of the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between India and Singapore by virtue of its agreement with Cushman & Wakefield India Pvt. Ltd.?

vii.        If the answer to 6 above is in affirmative, whether the whole or any part thereof (if so what part) can be attributed to the Permanent Establishment?

(Click here for full text of Ruling AIT-2008-216-AAR )

Related News:

 

  Copyright © 2006 allindiantaxes.com | All rights reserved
website designing India & CMS development: Softlogics & Developments