The Tribunal held in
favour of assessee as under:
1) Tesco Hong Kong was
invoiced for the goods and re-invoices the goods to the buyer without any mark
up. It charges 5% commission on products sourced. The Indian Liaison office
(‘LO’) of Tesco facilitates sourcing of goods by Tesco group companies;
2) Therefore, in the
instant case, other facts being more or less same as in Nike's case, the above
facts satisfy the condition "for the purpose of export" in Explanation
1(b) to section 9(1)(i)
more precisely than the facts of the Nike case, where Nike LO sourced goods for
the affiliates from India as goods were purchased by the affiliates directly
from the vendor in India and Nike Inc. didn't purchase by itself and sell to
its subsidiaries, but, arranged for the purchase by Nike affiliates from India;
3) As there was no
evidence on record to suggest that Tesco's Indian LO indulged in commercial
activities and that it was in fact a PE, exemption under Explanation
1(b) to section 9(1)(i) could
not be denied - Tesco International Sourcing Ltd. v. Dy. DIT(International
Taxation) [2014] 41 taxmann.com 241 (Bangalore - Trib.)
No comments:
Post a Comment