WESTIN HOTEL MANAGEMENT, LP.,NOIDA vs. ACIT, CIRLCE-3(1)(2) INT. TAXATION, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 8668/DEL/2019Status: HeardITAT Delhi21 July 2022AY 2016-1713 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal followed its own earlier decision in the assessee's own case for a prior assessment year. Based on the parity of facts, the Tribunal directed the AO to delete the additions made on account of Royalty and FTS.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a US-based hotel management company, received payments for providing hotel-related services in India. The Assessing Officer treated a significant portion of these payments as Royalty and Fees for Technical Services (FTS). The CIT(A) upheld the AO's decision, relying on his previous year's order.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the taxability of payments received by the assessee for hotel-related services as Royalty and FTS in India.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 9(1)(vi),Section 9(1)(vii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘D’, NEW DELHI

Before: SH. N. K. BILLAIYA & SH. N.K. CHOUDHRY

Hearing: 21/07/2022Pronounced: 21/07/2022

ORDER PER N.K. BILLAIYA, AM:

This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the CIT(A)-43, New Delhi dated 28.08.2019 pertaining to A.Y.2016-17

2.

The grievance of the assessee read as under :-

3.

At the very outset, the counsel for the assessee stated that the substantive issues raised in the grounds of appeal has been considered and decided by this Tribunal in favour of the assessee and against the revenue.

4.

The DR fairly conceded to this.

5.

We have carefully perused the orders of the authorities below and have duly considered the decision of this Tribunal in order dated 29.04.2022.

6.

Briefly stated that the facts of the case are that the appellant assessee is a firm incorporated under the laws of United States of America and resident thereof. It is engaged in the business of providing hotel related services in several countries around the world. The assessee is group entity of Starwood.

7.

In India the assessee has entered into agreements with various Indian hotels for provision of hotel related services inter- alia worldwide publicity, marketing and advertising services through its system of sales, advertising, promotion, public relations and reservations.

8.

During the course of scrutiny assessment proceedings and taking leaf out of the earlier assessment years in respect of the payments received by the assessee for such services the AO observed as under :-

9.

The assessment was completed by treating Rs.28875531/- as Royalty and Rs.39,28,87,342/- as FTS/ FIS.

10.

The Action of the AO was challenged before the CIT(A) and the CTI(A) was also carried away with the findings given by him in A.Y. 2015-16. The relevant part of the order of the CIT(A) read as under :-

5.1 Ground No.2 & 3 The facts of the present case are similar to the case of the appellant disposed by me earlier for Assessment Year 2015-16, Appeal No.73/2017-18. The principle issue is the taxability of the consideration of Rs. 39,28,87,342 received by the appellant for rendering services to the client hotels to which the license has been granted and taxable royalty is being received on the same. The considerations in the earlier year were also of the same nature and a' similar addition was decided upon by me. The Ground no 2 and 3 in the present appeal are in substance identical to the Ground no 3 of the earlier appeal.

11.

Thereafter the CIT(A) followed the findings given in A.Y.2015-16 as under :-

12.

This quarrel was considered by this Tribunal in assessee’s own case in for A.Y.2015-16 vide order dated 29.04.2022. The relevant findings of the coordinate Bench read as under :-

xxxx

13.

On finding parity of facts, respectfully following the decision of the coordinate Bench (supra) we direct the AO to delete the impugned additions. The appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed.

14.

Decision announced in the open court on 21.07.2022.

More judgments on Section 9(1)(vi)

All 1,705 judgments and leading authorities on Section 9(1)(vi) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →