Commissioner of Income-tax (IT)-4 v. WNS North America Inc - 2020-LL-0109-39

Citation	2020-LL-0109-39
Appellant Name	Commissioner of Income-tax (IT)-4
Respondent Name	WNS North America Inc.
Court	HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Relevant Act	Income-tax
Date of Order	09/01/2020
Assessment Year	2010-11
Judgment	View Judgment
Keyword Tags	royalty • dtaa • reimbursement of expense
Bot Summary:	P.C. :- Heard learned Counsel for the parties. The Appellant Revenue has framed following question as a substantial question of law :- 2 21.1. ITXA 1768.17.doc Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon ble Tribunal was justified in holding that reimbursement of international telecom connectivity charges amounting to Rs.10,62,04,649/- by WNS India does not qualify as Royalty under Article 12(3)(b) of the India-USA DTAA 5. The learned Counsel for the parties have brought to our attention that this question of law in Assessee s own case has been held against the Appellant Revenue in order dated 7 February 2018 in Income Tax Appeal Nos. In view of this position, the question as framed do not give rise to any substantial question of law and the Appeal is accordingly dismissed. We may note the contentions advanced by the learned Senior Advocate for the Respondent that there is a concurrent finding that the amounts in question had nothing to do with the technology transfer as they were pure reimbursement of travel accommodation expenses and in view of the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Director of Income-Tax 392 ITR 186, the Appeal does not give rise to any substantial question of law.

IN HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 1768 OF 2017 Commissioner of Income Tax (IT)-4 Appellant V/s. M/s. WNS North America Inc. ... Respondent Mr. Tejveer Singh for Appellant Ms. Porus Kaka, Senior Advocate a/w. Mr. Manish Kanth i/b. Mr. Atul Jasani for Respondent CORAM : NITIN JAMDAR & M.S. KARNIK, JJ. DATE : 09 JANUARY 2020. P.C. :- Heard learned Counsel for parties. 2. Appeal pertains to Assessment Year 2010-11. 3. This Appeal under Section 260A of Income Tax Act, 1961 challenges order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal) dated 18 November 2016. 4. Appellant Revenue has framed following question as substantial question of law :- 2 21.1. ITXA 1768.17.doc Whether on facts and in circumstances of case and in law, Hon ble Tribunal was justified in holding that reimbursement of international telecom connectivity charges amounting to Rs.10,62,04,649/- by WNS India does not qualify as Royalty under Article 12(3)(b) of India-USA DTAA ? 5. learned Counsel for parties have brought to our attention that this question of law in Assessee s own case has been held against Appellant Revenue in order dated 7 February 2018 in Income Tax Appeal Nos. 890 of 2015 and 891 of 2015. In view of this position, question as framed do not give rise to any substantial question of law and Appeal is accordingly dismissed. 6. Before closing, we may note contentions advanced by learned Senior Advocate for Respondent that there is concurrent finding that amounts in question had nothing to do with technology transfer as they were pure reimbursement of travel accommodation expenses and in view of decision of Apex Court in case of Director of Income-Tax (International Taxation v/s. A.P. Moller Maersk A/S - (2017) 392 ITR 186 (SC), Appeal does not give rise to any substantial question of law. M.S. KARNIK, J. NITIN JAMDAR, J. Digitally Jyoti signed by Jyoti P. Pawar P. Commissioner of Income-tax (IT)-4 v. WNS North America Inc

Metadata

Judgment