Case Law Details

Case Name : Mitsubishi Corporation India Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi)
Appeal Number : IT Appeal No.-945/2015
Date of Judgement/Order : 26/05/2015
Related Assessment Year :
Courts : All ITAT (4624) ITAT Delhi (1009)

Income Tax Return due date extended to 7th September 2015

Brief of the case: The ITAT New Delhi in the case of Mitsubishi Corporation India has ruled that the non-discriminatory clause is not applicable only for the limited purpose of transfer pricing adjustments and other additions to income can be removed by taking benefit of non-discriminatory clause of India-Japan DTAA.

Facts of the case:

  • Assessee company made purchases from its associated enterprise Mitusubishi Corporation Japan (MCJ) and its branches.
  • Assessee remitted the payment on account of purchases to MCJ without deducting tax at source because as per assessee TDS is not applicable under the non-discriminatory clause of Article 24 of India – Japan DTAA.
  • AO did not agree with the claim of assessee on the ground thatnon-discriminatory clause cannot be applied as the case is covered by Article 9 which provides that in case of transaction between Associated Enterprises (AEs)discriminatory clause is not applicable .

Contention of Assessee:

  • Article 24 provides that for the purposes of determining the taxable profits of an Indian enterprise, any disbursements made to a Japanese enterprise shall be deductiblein the same manner as if it had been made to an Indian resident.
  • Thus, for the purpose of claiming deduction of any disbursements the non-resident can be treated as resident and such treatment is termed as non-discrimination.
  • The provisions of Act not provide for tax deduction at source for payment made to resident on account of purchases.

Contention of Revenue:

  • Article 9 has superseding effect over Article 9 and in case of transaction between AEs the benefit of non-discrimination clause cannot be taken.
  • Therefore, addition made under Article 9 cannot be deleted by invoking non-discriminatory clause of Article 24.              

Held by ITAT New Delhi:

  • The point of dispute is that whether assessee can claim the benefit of non-discriminatory clause under Article 24 of the DTAA between India and Japan for non-deduction of tax on import purchases from Japan.
  • Para 3 of Article 24 provides that any payment made by an Indian enterprise to a Japanese enterprise towards interest, royalties and other disbursements shall be deemed as payment made to Indian enterprise.However, this para is subject to Article 9.
  • Article 9 provides that transaction between two associated enterprises should be valued at arm’s lengthprice.
  • On a joint reading of Article 9 and 24, it can be concluded that Article 9 even if having superseding effect over Article 24,does not make it totally ineffective. It is why because Article 9 provides that transfer pricing adjustments are not subject to the benefits provided under non-discriminatory clause of Article24.
  • In the present case, assessee is not exercising the provisions of clause 24 for deleting transfer pricing adjustments but for removing the applicability of disallowance for non-deduction of taxu/s 40(a) (i).
  • Disallowance u/s 40(a)(i) is an independent component of the computation of total income which is distinct from any transfer pricing adjustment.
  • Thus, the disallowance cannot be made under Article 9 which is not applicable here and as such benefit of non-discriminatory clause of Article 24 can be very well taken to treat the payee as resident.
Download Judgment/Order

More Under Income Tax

Posted Under

Category : Income Tax (26354)
Type : Judiciary (10619)
Tags : CA Saurabh Chokhra (237) DTAA (304) ITAT Judgments (4805)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *