GENERAL ANTI-AVOIDANCE RULE (GAAR)
The question of substance over form has consistently arisen in the implementation of taxation laws. In the Indian context, judicial decisions have varied. While some courts in certain circumstances had held that legal form of transactions can be dispensed with and the real substance of transaction can be considered while applying the taxation laws, others have held that the form is to be given sanctity. The existence of anti-avoidance principles are based on various judicial pronouncements. There are some specific anti-avoidance provisions but general anti-avoidance has been dealt only through judicial decisions in specific cases.
In an environment of moderate rates of tax, it is necessary that the correct tax base be subject to tax in the face of aggressive tax planning and use of opaque low tax jurisdictions for residence as well as for sourcing capital. Most countries have codified the “substance over form” doctrine in the form of General Anti Avoidance Rule (GAAR).
In the above background and keeping in view the aggressive tax planning with the use of sophisticated structures, there is a need for statutory provisions so as to codify the doctrine of “substance over form” where the real intention of the parties and effect of transactions and purpose of an arrangement is taken into account for determining the tax consequences, irrespective of the legal structure that has been superimposed to camouflage the real intent and purpose. Internationally several countries have introduced, and are administering statutory General Anti Avoidance Provisions. It is, therefore, important that Indian taxation law also incorporate a statutory General Anti Avoidance Provisions to deal with aggressive tax planning. The basic criticism of statutory GAAR which is raised worldwide is that it provides a wide discretion and authority to the tax administration which at times is prone to be misused. This vital aspect, therefore, needs to be kept in mind while formulating any GAAR regime.
It is accordingly proposed to provide General Anti Avoidance Rule in the Income Tax Act to deal with aggressive tax planning.
A. The main feature of such a regime are
(i) An arrangement whose main purpose or one of the main purposes is to obtain a tax benefit and which also satisfies at least one of the four tests, can be declared as an “impermissible avoidance arrangements”.
(ii) The four tests referred to in (i) are–
(a) The arrangement creates rights and obligations, which are not normally created between parties dealing at arm’s length.
(b) It results in misuse or abuse of provisions of tax laws.
(c) It lacks commercial substance or is deemed to lack commercial substance.
(d) Is carried out in a manner, which is normally not employed for bonafide purpose.
(iii) It shall be presumed that obtaining of tax benefit is the main purpose of an arrangement unless otherwise proved by the taxpayer.
(iv) An arrangement will be deemed to lack commercial substance if –
(a) the substance or effect of the arrangement as a whole, is inconsistent with, or differs significantly from, the form of its individual steps or a part; or
(b) it involves or includes –
(i) round trip financing;
(ii) an accommodating party ;
(iii) elements that have effect of offsetting or cancelling each other; or
(iv) a transaction which is conducted through one or more persons and disguises the value, location, source, ownership or control of fund which is subject matter of such transaction; or
(c) it involves the location of an asset or of a transaction or of the place of residence of any party which would not have been so located for any substantial commercial purpose other than obtaining tax benefit for a party.
(v) It is also provided that certain circumstances like period of existence of arrangement, taxes arising from arrangement, exit route, shall not be taken into account while determining ‘lack of commercial substance’ test for an arrangement.
(vi) Once the arrangement is held to be an impermissible avoidance arrangement then the consequences of the arrangement in relation to tax or benefit under a tax treaty can be determined by keeping in view the circumstances of the case, however, some of the illustrative steps are:-
(a) disregarding or combining any step of the arrangement.
(b) ignoring the arrangement for the purpose of taxation law.
(c) disregarding or combining any party to the arrangement.
(d) reallocating expenses and income between the parties to the arrangement.
(e) relocating place of residence of a party, or location of a transaction or situs of an asset to a place other than provided in the arrangement.
(f) considering or looking through the arrangement by disregarding any corporate structure. (g) re-characterizing equity into debt, capital into revenue etc.
(vii) These provisions can be used in addition to or in conjunction with other anti avoidance provisions or provisions for determination of tax liability, which are provided in the taxation law.
(viii) For effective application in cross border transaction and to prevent treaty abuse a limited treaty override is also provided.
B. The procedure for invoking GAAR is proposed as under:-
(i) It is proposed that the Assessing Officer shall make a reference to the Commissioner for invoking GAAR and on receipt of reference the Commissioner shall hear the taxpayer and if he is not satisfied by the reply of taxpayer and is of the opinion that GAAR provisions are to be invoked, he shall refer the matter to an Approving Panel. In case the assessee does not object or reply, the Commissioner shall make determination as to whether the arrangement is an impermissible avoidance arrangement or not.
(ii) The Approving Panel has to dispose of the reference within a period of six months from the end of the month in which the reference was received from the Commissioner
(iii) The Approving Panel shall either declare an arrangement to be impermissible or declare it not to be so after examining material and getting further inquiry to be made.
(iv) The Assessing Officer (AO) will determine consequences of such a positive declaration of arrangement as impermissible avoidance arrangement.
(v) The final order in case any consequence of GAAR is determined shall be passed by AO only after approval by Commissioner and, thereafter, first appeal against such order shall lie to the Appellate Tribunal.
(vi) The period taken by the proceedings before Commissioner and Approving Panel shall be excluded from time limitation for completion of assessment.
(vii) The Approving Panel shall be set up by the Board and would comprise of officers of rank of Commissioner and above. The panel will have a minimum of three members. The procedure and working of Panel shall be administered through subordinate legislation.
In addition to the above, it is provided that the Board shall prescribe a scheme for regulating the condition and manner of application of these provisions.
These amendments will take effect from 1st April, 2013 and will, accordingly, apply in relation to the assessment year 2013-14 and subsequent assessment years.