#taxlaw Archives - Fox Mandal

Home / #taxlaw

Taxation (Amendment) Bill, 2021: Regaining Investor Confidence

The retrospective clarificatory amendment regarding taxability of indirect transfers and consequent demand raised in a few cases, had created doubts and serious concerns for potential investors in our country and had also tarnished India’s image in the international community. The country today stands at a juncture when quick recovery of the economy after the COVID-19 pandemic, is the need of the hour and foreign investment has an important role to play in promoting faster economic growth and employment. With this objective in mind, the Hon. Finance Minister of India has proposed this Taxation Laws (Amendment) Bill 2021 (“the Bill’), to put an end to the protracted litigation on this subject matter.

The issue regarding taxability of indirect transfer of assets located within the country, by transferring shares of an intermediary foreign company, was first analyzed in the case of Vodafone International Holdings (‘Vodafone’). In that case, Vodafone had acquired 100 percent shares of a Cayman Island based subsidiary company, from Hutchison Telecommunication International Ltd. (‘HTIL’), which was holding 67 percent controlling interest in Hutchison Essar Limited (‘HEL’), an Indian Joint venture company. Through this transaction, Vodafone had indirectly acquired a controlling interest of 67% in HEL, without triggering any taxable event in India. However, the Indian Revenue authorities had served a notice on Vodafone for not withholding tax under section 195 of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) on the consideration that was paid by it to HTIL.

The controversy was finally settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court (‘SC’) in 2012 in favour of Vodafone[1]. The SC had ruled that the word “through” in section 9 of the Act does not mean “in consequence of” and “sale of share in question to Vodafone, did not amount to transfer of capital asset within the meaning of section 2(14) of the Act”. Accordingly, an indirect transfer of Indian assets by transferring shares in a foreign company was not chargeable to tax in India and therefore was not liable to any withholding tax.

Retrospective Amendment in Finance Act, 2012:

In order to override the SC decision and tax such Indirect transfer transactions, the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) had introduced an amendment under section 9(1) of the Act, which was made effective retrospectively from 01 April 1962. The Finance Act, 2012 had inserted a clarificatory Explanation 4 and Explanation 5 to section 9(1)(i), as under:

“Explanation 4— For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that the expression “through” shall mean and include and shall be deemed to have always meant and included “by means of”, “in consequence of” or “by reason of”.

Explanation 5— For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that an asset or a capital asset being any share or interest in a company or entity registered or incorporated outside India shall be deemed to be and shall always be deemed to have been situated in India, if the share or interest derives, directly or indirectly, its value substantially from the assets located in India”

The above retrospective amendments created doubts in the minds of the stakeholders regarding the stability of India’s tax laws and also invited huge criticism and embarrassment at the international level.

Pursuant to this retrospective amendment, income tax demand had been raised in seventeen cases by the Revenue authorities. In four cases, the aggrieved taxpayers had preferred arbitration under India’s Bilateral Investment Protection Treaty with the United Kingdom and the Netherlands, respectively. Recently, the respective Arbitration Tribunals have, in the case of Vodafone International Holding BV vs. The Republic of India as well as in Cairn Energy PLC vs. The Republic of India, ruled in favour of the assessee and against the Government of India. The government of India has challenged both this arbitration award.

Proposed Amendment:

The Bill [2] proposes to amend the Act and abolish the retrospective tax on indirect transfer of Indian assets, if the transaction was undertaken before 28 May 2012 [3].

The amendment proposes to insert three provisos (fourth, fifth and sixth) under Explanation 5 to section 9(1)(i), thereby nullifying:

any pending or concluded assessment or reassessment; or
any order enhancing the demand / reducing the refund; or
any order deeming a person to be an “assessee in default” for non-withholding of tax; or
any order imposing a penalty

with respect to any income accruing or arising from the transfer of an Indian asset pursuant to the transfer of shares in a foreign company.

Therefore, all assessments or rectification applications (pending/ concluded) before the Revenue authorities, to the extent it relates to the computation of income from any indirect transfer of assets, shall be deemed to have concluded/ have never been passed without any additions.

Specified Conditions:

Relief under the proposed amendment would be available only to assessees fulfilling the following specified conditions:

The assessee shall either withdraw or submit an undertaking to withdraw any appeal filed before the Tribunal, High Court or Supreme Court with respect to the indirect transfer, in such form and manner as may be prescribed [4];

The assessee shall either withdraw or submit an undertaking to withdraw any proceeding for arbitration, conciliation or mediation, with respect to the indirect transfer, in such form and manner as may be prescribed [3];

The assessee shall furnish an undertaking waiving his right, whether direct or indirect, to seek or pursue any remedy or any claim in relation to indirect transfer in such form and manner as may be prescribed [3].

Pursuant to fulfillment of the specified conditions, where any amount becomes refundable to the person referred to in the fifth proviso, then, such amount shall be refunded to such person, without any interest on such refund under section 244A of the Act.

FM Comments:

The amendment is a proactive step aimed at neutralizing the criticism and embarrassment caused by retrospective amendment and regaining the stakeholder’s confidence in Indian judicial system. Such measures from the Government will certainly create a positive sentiment and a sense of tax certainty amongst the investors and hopefully, help in attracting incremental foreign investment into the country, which will play an important role in promoting faster economic growth and development.

References:

[1] Vodafone International Holdings B.V. vs. UOI (2012) 341 ITR 1 (SC)

[2] President is yet to give his assent on the said Amendment Bill

[3] Date on which Finance Bill, 2012 received assent of the President

[4] Form for submitting undertaking is yet to be prescribed

Image Credits: Photo by Michael Longmire on Unsplash

Such measures from the Government will certainly create a positive sentiment and a sense of tax certainty amongst the investors and hopefully, help in attracting incremental foreign investment into the country, that will play an important role in promoting faster economic growth and development.

POST A COMMENT

Home / #taxlaw

Tax Alert: Latest COVID-19 Related Relaxations and Exemptions Issued by the Government

In view of the prevailing COVID-19 pandemic situation in the country, resulting in hardship and difficulty vis-à-vis complying with various due dates under the Indian Income tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) and causing severe impact on the cash flows, the Central Board of Direct Taxes (‘CBDT’) has time and again issued relevant Notifications, Circulars and Press Releases extending the due date w.r.t various direct tax compliances.

Updated as on 13^th July 2021

In the table below, we have summarized the key Notifications and Circulars issued by the CBDT, which has extended the due dates of various direct tax compliances under the Act:

Sr No	Compliance Particulars	Original Due Date	Extended Due Date[1]
1	Objections to Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) and Assessing officer under section 144C	01 June 2021	31 August 2021 (note 1)
2	Statement of Deduction of Tax for the last quarter of the Financial Year 2020-21	31 May 2021	15 July 2021
3	Certificate of Tax Deducted at Source in Form 16	15 June 2021	31 July 2021
4	Statement of income paid or credited in Form 64D by Investment Fund to its unit holders for Financial Year 2020-2021	15 June 2021	15 July 2021
5	Statement of income paid or credited in Form 64C by Investment Fund to its unit holders for Financial Year 2020-2021	30 June 2021	31 July 2021
6	The application under Section 10(23C), 12AB, 35(1)(i i)/(iia)/(iii) and 80G of the Act in Form No. 10Af Form No.10AB. for registration/ provisional registration/ intimation/ approval/ provisional approval of Trusts/ Institutions/ Research Associations	30 June 2021	31 August 2021
7	Compliances for claiming exemption under provisions contained in sections 54 to 54GB	01 April 2021 to 29 September 2021	01 April 2021 to 30 September 2021
8	Quarterly Statement in Form 15CC to be furnished by Authorized Dealer in respect of foreign remittances made for quarter ended 30^th June 2021	15 July 2021	31 July 2021
9	Equalization Levy Statement in Form 1 for Financial Year 2020-21	30 June 2021	31 July 2021
10	Time Limit for processing Equalization Levy return	–	30 September 2021
11	Annual Statement in Form 3CEK to be furnished under section 9A(5) by Eligible Investment Fund	29 June 2021	31 July 2021
12	Uploading declaration received from recipients in Form No 15G / 15H for quarter ended 30^thJune 2021	15 July 2021	31 August 2021
13	Exercising of option under section 245M(1) in Form No. 34BB for withdrawing application before Settlement Commission	27 June 2021	31 July 2021
14	Last date of linking of Aadhar with PAN under section 139AA	31 March 2021	30 September 2021
15	Last date of payment under Vivad se Vishwas (without additional amount)	–	31 August 2021
16	Last date of payment under Vivad se Vishwas (with additional amount)	–	31 October 2021
17	Time Limit for passing assessment / reassessment order	31 March 2021	30 September 2021
18	Time Limit for passing penalty order	–	30 September 2021
19	Due date for furnishing Return of Income – Non Audit Case	31 July 2021	30 September 2021
20	Due date for furnishing Tax Audit Report	30 September 2021	31 October 2021
21	Due date for furnishing Transfer Pricing Audit	31 October 2021	30 November 2021
22	Due date for furnishing Return of Income – Audit case	31 October 2021	30 November 2021
23	Due date for furnishing Return of Income where Transfer Pricing is applicable	30 November 2021	31 December 2021
24	Belated / Revised return for Assessment Year 2021-22	31 December 2021	31 January 2022

Note:

1) If the last date allowed u/s. 144C is later than 31 August 2021 then such a later date shall prevail.

References:

[1] Notification No 74/2021 & 75/2021 and Circular No 9/2021 dated 20 May 2021 and 12/2021 dated 25 June 2021

Image Credits: Photo by Nataliya Vaitkevich from Pexels

We have summarized the key notifications and circulars issued by the CBDT, extending the due dates of various direct tax compliances under the Act.

POST A COMMENT

Home / #taxlaw

Tax Alert: New Rules for Determining Taxability on Reconstitution of Firms

Background

Finance Act, 2021 had inserted a new section 9B under the Income-tax Act, 1961 (Act) which provides that where a specified person^[3] receives any capital asset or stock in trade or both from a specified entity ^[4] on dissolution or reconstitution of such specified entity, then such specified entity shall be deemed to have transferred such capital asset or stock in trade, or both, in the year in which such capital asset or stock in trade or both are received by the specified person and shall be chargeable to tax as income of the specified entity in that year, under the head “Profits and gains of business or profession” or under the head “Capital gains”, as the case may be. It is also provided that fair market value (FMV) of such capital asset or stock in trade, shall be deemed to be the full value of consideration as a result of such deemed transfer. Further, Finance Act, 2021 had also substituted the provisions of section 45(4) of the Act, which now provides that where a specified person receives any money or capital asset or both from a specified entity in connection with the reconstitution of such specified entity, then any profits or gains arising from such receipt by the specified person shall be chargeable to tax as income of the specified entity under the head “Capital gains” in that year. The amount chargeable to tax under section 45(4) of the Act shall be calculated as per the below-mentioned formula. A = B + C – D where, A = Income chargeable to tax under section 45(4) of the Act B = Value of any money received by the specified person C = Amount of FMV of the capital asset received by the specified person D = Amount of balance in the capital account [represented in any manner (excluding increase due to revaluation of any asset or due to self-generated goodwill or any other self-generated asset)] of the specified person in the books of account of the specified entity at the time of reconstitution. It is also clarified that the provisions of section 45(4) shall operate in addition to the provisions of section 9B and accordingly the taxation under these provisions need to be worked out independently. The Finance Act, 2021 has also inserted a new clause (iii) under section 48 of the Act (deduction from the full value of consideration) which provides that the amount of income chargeable to tax under section 45(4) which is attributable to the capital asset being transferred by the specified entity shall be calculated in the prescribed manner. It may be noted that the above-mentioned provisions are applicable w.r.e.f 1 April 2021 i.e. from the tax year 2020-21 onwards.

Notification/Circular

The Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT), vide notification^[1] dated 2^nd July 2021, has inserted a new sub-rule 5 under Rule 8AA of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 (Rules) which deals with the characterisation of capital gains under section 45(4) of the Act. The CBDT has also notified Rule 8AB, which deals with the attribution of income taxable under section 45(4) of the Act to the capital assets remaining with the specified entity. Additionally, the CBDT, vide circular^[2] dated 2^nd July 2021, has also issued guidelines for practical application of provisions under section 9B and section 45(4) of the Act. This tax alert summarizes the notification and guidelines issued by the CBDT as under: In order to avoid double taxation of the same amount, the provisions of section 45(4) r.w.s 48(iii) of the Act requires that the amount taxed under section 45(4) of the Act should be attributed to the remaining capital asset(s) of the specified entity, such that when these capital asset(s) get transferred in the future, the amount attributed to such capital asset(s) gets reduced from the full value of consideration.

It is further clarified that the revaluation of an asset or valuation of self-generated asset or goodwill does not entitle the specified entity for deprecation on such increased value.

The specified entity is required to furnish, electronically, the details of the amount attributed to the capital asset remaining with the specified entity in Form No 5C on or before the due date as prescribed under section 139(1) of the Act.

Applicability of Attribution Rule (Rule 8AB) to Capital Assets Forming Part of Block of Assets

It was observed that the current provisions provide attribution of capital gains under section 45(4) of the Act only for the purpose of section 48 of the Act. It may be noted that provisions of section 48 apply to capital assets that do not form part of block of assets.

Accordingly, in order to provide clarity and remove the difficulty, the CBDT has stated that the attribution rule i.e. Rule 8AB of the Rules shall also apply in relation to capital assets forming part of the block of assets.

It is further clarified that the amount attributed under Rule 8AB of the Rules shall be reduced from the full value of the consideration received or accruing as a result of the subsequent transfer and accordingly net consideration shall be reduced from the written-down value (WDV) of the block of assets under section 43(6)(c) of the Act or for the purpose of calculating capital gains under section 50 of the Act.

Characterization of capital gains under section 45(4) of the Act

The CBDT has notified Rule 8AA(5) under the Rules which provides for characterization of the nature of capital gains (i.e. long term or short term) under section 45(4) of the Act. It provides that where the amount of capital gains chargeable under section 45(4) is attributed to short term capital asset, capital asset forming part of a block of assets or capital asset, being self-generated asset or goodwill, then the capital gains under section 45(4) shall be deemed to be from the transfer of short-term capital asset; otherwise, it shall be deemed to be transferred from long term capital asset.

Examples under the Guidelines

In order to better understand the provisions, few examples have been given in the guidelines:

Example 1

Facts

There are three equal partners A, B and C in a Firm ‘FR’ having a capital balance of INR 10 lacs each. The details of capital assets held by the firm are as under.

Partner ‘A’ wishes to exit and accordingly the firm decides to give him INR 11 lacs of money and Land ‘U’ to settle his capital balance.

Tax Implications

A. Under section 9B of the Act

It shall be deemed that the Firm ‘FR’ has transferred the Land ‘U’ to Partner ‘A’ and accordingly an amount of INR 35 lakhs (50 – 15) shall be chargeable to tax in the hands of ‘FR’ under the head capital gains as long-term capital gains and a tax liability of INR 7 lakhs (assuming no surcharge or cess) shall be payable.

For Partner ‘A’, the cost of acquisition Land ‘U’ would thus be INR 50 lakhs.

B. Accounting in the books of Firm ‘FR’

The net book profit after tax of INR 33 lakhs (computed as amount of capital gains without indexation INR 40 lakhs less tax of INR 7 lakhs) shall be credited to each Partner’s capital account i.e. INR 11 lakhs each.

Pursuant to the above, the capital balance of Partner ‘A’ would increase to INR 21 lakhs (10+11).

C. Under section 45(4) of the Act

Capital gains in the hands of the firm shall be calculated as per the afore-mentioned formula.

The capital gains of INR 40 lakhs shall be chargeable to tax in the hands of Firm ‘FR’ in addition to INR 35 lakhs chargeable under section 9B of the Act.

D. Attribution of capital gains as per Rule 8AB of the Rules to the remaining capital assets

Subsequently, when the Land ‘S’ or Land ‘T’ would be transferred by the Firm ‘FR’, the amount of attribution would get reduced from the full value of consideration as per the provisions of section 48(iii) of the Act.

E. Characterization of capital gains

Since the amount of INR 40 lakhs charged to tax under section 45(4) of the Act has been attributed to Land ‘S’ and Land ‘T’, being long term capital assets, such amount shall be chargeable as long term capital gains as per Rule 8AA(5) of the Rules.

Example 2

Facts

The facts of Example 2 are the same as in Example 1 with a modification that the Firm ‘FR’ sells the Land ‘U’ at FMV of INR 50 lakhs to an outsider and on the exit of Partner ‘A’, the Firm decides to give him INR 61 lakhs to settle his capital balance.

Tax Implications

A. Under section 9B and section 45 of the Act

Since neither ‘capital asset’ nor ‘stock in trade’ have been distributed to Partner ‘A’, the provisions of section 9B of the Act do not get triggered. However, the Firm would be liable to normal capital gains tax on the sale of Land ‘U’. Accordingly, an amount of INR 35 lakhs (50 – 15) shall be chargeable to tax in the hands of ‘FR’ under the head capital gains as long-term capital gains and tax liability of INR 7 lakhs (assuming no surcharge or cess) shall be payable.

B. Under section 45(4) of the Act

Capital gains in the hands of the firm shall be calculated as per the afore-mentioned formula.

The capital gains of INR 40 lakhs shall be chargeable to tax in the hands of Firm ‘FR’ under section 45(4) of the Act.

C. Attribution of capital gains as per Rule 8AB of the Rules to the remaining capital assets

Subsequently, when the Land ‘S’ or Land ‘T’ would be transferred by the Firm ‘FR’, the amount of attribution would get reduced from full value of consideration as per the provisions of section 48(iii) of the Act.

D. Characterization of capital gains

In effect, the final result in both Example 1 and 2 would be same due to operation of section 9B of the Act.

Example 3

Facts

There are three equal partners A, B and C in a Firm ‘FR’ having capital balance of INR 100 lacs each. The details of capital assets held by the firm are as under.

Partner ‘A’ wishes to exit and accordingly the firm decides to give him INR 75 lacs in money and Land ‘S’ to settle his capital balance.

Tax Implications

A. Under section 9B of the Act

It shall be deemed that the Firm ‘FR’ has transferred the Land ‘S’ to Partner ‘A’. However, since the full value of consideration is equal to indexed cost of acquisition, there would be no capital gain tax in the hands of the Firm.

For Partner ‘A’, the cost of acquisition would be INR 45 lakhs.

B. Accounting in the books of Firm ‘FR’

The net book profit after tax of INR 15 lakhs (computed as amount of capital gains without indexation) shall be credited to each Partners capital account i.e. INR 5 lakhs each.

Pursuant to above, the capital balance of Partner ‘A’ would increase to INR 105 lakhs (100+5).

C. Under section 45(4) of the Act

Capital gains in the hands of the firm shall be calculated as per afore-mentioned formula.

The capital gains of INR 15 lakhs shall be chargeable to tax in the hands of Firm ‘FR’.

D. Attribution of capital gains as per Rule 8AB of the Rules to the remaining capital assets

Subsequently, when the Firm transfers ‘Patent’ or ‘Goodwill’, the amount of attribution would get reduced from full value of consideration as per the provisions of section 48(iii) or section 43(6)(c) or section 50 of the Act, as the case may be.

It may also be noted that for the purpose of computing depreciation under section 32 of the Act, the WDV of the block of asset of which ‘Patent’ is a part, shall remain INR 45 lakhs only and should not be increased to INR 60 Lakhs. Similarly, no depreciation would be allowed on self-generated ‘Goodwill’.

E. Characterization of capital gains

Since the amount of INR 15 lakhs charged to tax under section 45(4) of the Act has been attributed to asset forming block of asset i.e. Patent and to self-generated Goodwill, such amount shall be chargeable as short term capital gains as per Rule 8AA(5) of the Rules.

FM Comments

The detailed guidelines and notification issued by the CBDT is indeed a welcome move and shall certainly help in addressing various concerns of the taxpayers. However, beyond the 3 specific Examples illustrated, in our view, there would be certain other issues which may require similar deliberation and clarification.

It is pertinent to note that the substituted provisions 45(4) and section 9B of the Act are applicable w.r.e.f. 1 April 2021 (i.e. from tax year 2020-21 onwards), whereas the rules for attribution of income and its characterization have been notified on 2 July 2021. The notification is silent with respect to the date of its applicability.

Generally, such notifications come into force on the date of its publication in the Official Gazette, unless the effective date of its applicability is already provided in the notification itself. CBDT, while notifying Rule 8AA(5) and Rule 8AB, has not provided any ‘effective applicable date’ for the same and accordingly it may be inferred that such Rules are to be made effective from 2 July 2021. Thus, the question which may arise is whether Rule 8AA(5) and Rule 8AB would be applicable to the reconstitution of specified entities that have already been undertaken between 1 April 2020 to 1 July 2021.

It may further be noted that the earlier provisions of section 45(4) provided that the transfer of a capital asset on the dissolution of a firm was made chargeable to tax as the income of the firm. But the distribution of money on dissolution was neither chargeable to tax in the hands of the firm nor in the hands of the recipient Partner.

However, the new provisions of section 45(4) state that distribution of money or capital asset exceeding the balance in the capital account of Partner would now be chargeable to tax under the head “capital gains”. Accordingly, the new provisions create a charge of capital tax on the distribution of money. It may be noted that, generally, ‘money’ or ‘currency’ is not considered as a ‘capital asset’ and accordingly the issue which may arise is that whether the distribution of money could be taxed under the head ‘capital gains’ as there is no transfer of capital asset.

It is also pertinent to note that the attribution rules under Rule 8AB of the Rules would lead to a premature collection of the taxes by the Government, the benefit of which may or may not be obtained by the specified entity.

The specified entity would get the benefit of attribution only when they transfer the remaining capital assets subsequently, which is a contingent event, that may or may not happen. Further, in a case where the excess payment chargeable to tax under section 45(4) of the Act, relates to the valuation of self-generated goodwill, then the entity may not be able to claim the benefit of attribution unless the entity hives off its business undertaking, which is highly unlikely. Another interesting question that would arise is how the specified entity would be eligible to claim the benefit of attribution where remaining capital assets are transferred under tax-neutral arrangements.

Moreover, in a scenario, where the aggregate value of money received by the specified person exceeds the balance in his capital account and it does not relate to the revaluation of any capital assets, then the following issues may arise:

Characterization of capital gains as ‘Short-term’ or Long-term’ as no attribution of income would be made by the specified entity to the remaining capital assets under Rule 8AB.
Such excess payment may have been made by a specified entity due to other business reasons such as payment for non-compete, etc. Accordingly, the deductibility of such excess amount while computing the taxable income of the specified person, would be a challenge.

Going forward, it would be imperative for specified entities to carefully assess the impact of the above provisions while carrying out any reconstitution activity in order to avoid double taxation.

References: ^[1] “specified person” means a person, who is a partner of a firm or member of other association of persons or body of individuals (not being a company or a co-operative society) in any previous year. ^[2] “specified entity” means a firm or other association of persons or body of individuals (not being a company or a co-operative society). ^[3] Notification No. 76/2021 ^[4] Circular No. 14 of 2021 Image Credits: Photo by Nataliya Vaitkevich from Pexels

POST A COMMENT

Home / #taxlaw

CBDT notifies thresholds for determining ‘Significant Economic Presence’ in India

The concept of Significant Economic Presence (SEP) was introduced under Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) vide Finance Act, 2018, by way of insertion of Explanation 2A to section 9 of the Act, to expand the scope of the term ‘Business Connection’ and includes:

transaction in respect of any goods, services or property carried out by a non-resident with any person in India including provision of download of data or software in India, if the aggregate of payments arising from such transaction or transactions during the previous year exceeds such amount as may be prescribed; or

systematic and continuous soliciting of business activities or engaging in interaction with such number of users in India, as may be prescribed.

It was further provided that the transactions or activities shall constitute significant economic presence in India, whether:

the agreement for such transactions or activities is entered in India; or

the non-resident has a residence or place of business in India; or

the non-resident renders services in India.

The above-mentioned Explanation was inserted primarily for establishing Business Connection in India for Multinational entities carrying out business operations through digital means, without having any physical presence in India. However, its enforceability was deferred time and again as the discussion on this issue was ongoing under G20 – OECD BEPS project.

Notification No 41/2021/F. No. 370142/11/2018-TPL on Significant Economic Presence in India:

The Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT), vide its notification dated 3 May 2021[1] has stipulated Rule 11UD to prescribe the ‘revenue’ and ‘users’ threshold for the purpose of determining Significant Economic Presence (SEP) of a non-resident entity in India. It has come into force with effect from 1 April 2022 (i.e., Financial Year 2021-22 or Assessment Year 2022-23 onwards).

The threshold limit notified by CBDT for the purpose of SEP has been tabulated as under:

Sr. No.

Nature

Threshold Limit

Revenue threshold –

Transaction in respect of any goods, services or property carried out by a non-resident with any person in India including provision of download of data or software in India.

INR 2 crores

Number of users threshold –

Systematic and continuous soliciting of business activities or engaging in interaction with users in India

3 lakhs users

If either one of the above-mentioned thresholds is met by a non-resident entity, then such entity shall be deemed to have a business connection in India and accordingly would be liable to pay tax on income attributable to transactions or activities mentioned above, subject to the beneficial provisions of tax treaties, as may be applicable.

FM Comments:

It may be noted that this Explanation was inserted primarily with an intention to tax digital transactions which otherwise escapes tax net due to absence of physical presence in India. However, on careful reading of the provisions, it is possible to infer that SEP provisions may even cover the transactions which are carried out through non-digital means (i.e., even on ‘physical’ buying and selling of goods and services).

At this juncture, it is also imperative to mention that UN tax committee has recently approved Article 12B (Income from automated digital services) in the UN Model Tax Convention. It would be interesting to watch whether India renegotiates its tax treaties to include this Article in its tax treaties and its interplay with the SEP provisions.

Further, from a practical perspective, this provision may not have much impact on non-resident entities based out of countries with whom India has executed tax treaties, due to existence of the conventional Permanent Establishment (PE) provisions in the tax treaty, where PE exists based on the physical presence in India. It would be worthwhile to note that the provisions of section 9 of the Act does not override the provisions of tax treaty and hence unless the tax treaty is renegotiated to include provisions that are like SEP, it would not have any impact on entities based out of tax treaty countries.

Having said the above, SEP provisions could have major impact on non-resident entities based out of non-tax treaty countries as well as tax treaty countries to whom benefit under the covered tax treaty may get denied, pursuant to application of, inter alia, Article 7 – Prevention of treaty abuse of Multilateral Instrument (MLI); considering the lower threshold prescribed by CBDT, such entities may then become liable to SEP provisions and may also have to pay incremental tax in India. Additionally, those entities may then also be under obligation to undertake various tax compliances in India (such as withholding tax, filing of return of income, etc.).

The non-resident entities may face various practical challenges in determining the “revenue” and “user” thresholds and in cases where existence of Business Connection is determined based on SEP, the challenges would be in relation to attribution of profits that would be chargeable to tax in India. Accordingly, it is of paramount importance that CBDT provides adequate guidance to determine the thresholds on how the profit would be attributed to such SEP activities in India.

Last but not the least, it would be interesting to examine the interplay and co-existence or otherwise of Equalization Levy (EQL) vis-à-vis the SEP provisions. For instance, in cases where the transaction falls specifically under the EQL provisions, then such income should be exempt from tax under the provisions of the Act and accordingly the expanded scope of business connection should not apply.

References

[1] Notification No 41/2021/F. No. 370142/11/2018-TPL

Image Credits: Photo by Markus Winkler from Pexels

POST A COMMENT

Home / #taxlaw

2021 Budget Impact on the Real Estate Sector

February 17, 2021
Sandip Mukherjee

The Real Estate Sector has received an undeniable boost with the recommendations of the Union Budget of 2021. Projects like ‘Housing for All’ and ‘Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana’ (‘PMAY’) have always received emphasis under the Modi regime. Through the changes proposed to be implemented by the Union Budget of 2021, it is clear that measures like the granting of tax holidays for affordable housing and tax exemptions in the interest of migrant workers with regard to rental housing projects point towards the priority that the housing and Real Estate Sector enjoy in the current Union Government’s policy and execution scheme.

Considering the unavoidable and unforeseeable fiscal deficit that struck the economy with the onset of the pandemic in 2020; the Finance Ministry had to tread judiciously with limited room for any big announcements under the Union Budget of 2021.

The main standpoint with regard to the Real Estate sector that was observed was the policy of the government to promote and facilitate ‘Housing for All’ which entailed prioritizing and increasing access to and affordability of housing.

The Budget of 2021 allotted Rs. 54,581 crores to the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs.

Here is what the Real Estate gained in the Union Budget of 2021

Increase in safe harbour limit for primary sale of residential units	The safe harbour limit for the primary sale of residential units has been increased from 10% to 20% in order to increase the incentivisation of Real Estate developers and home buyers.
Incentivising Affordable Housing	In an instance of taking up a loan to purchase a house; the government had already allowed, in its 2019 Budget; a deduction of interest rate that amounted to a monetary sum of around Rs. 1.5 lakh to increase affordability and purchasing power. This deduction in interest rates for housing loans is proposed to be extended further for another year- till March 31, 2022 in the current Budget policy. This would mean that the deduction of Rs. 1.5 lakh will continue to be available for loans that are taken up in order to purchase houses at affordable rates till March 31, 2022. To further advance the procurement and supply of affordable housing, the current Budget also proposed a year-long tax holiday for affordable housing projects till March 31, 2022. With an unprecedented rise in the number of migrants all across the country due to the pandemic; Nirmala Sitharaman has also advanced the action of allowing for a tax exemption for notified “Affordable Rental Housing Projects” in order to facilitate and encourage the supply of Affordable Renting Housing to these migrant workers.
REITs	Further, the Budget has also encouraged debt financing of InVITs and REITs by Foreign Portfolio Investors by according relevant amendments to legislations. These amendments would facilitate ease of financing to InVITs and REITs, consequently promoting greater funds for the real estate and infrastructure sectors. The Finance Ministry also went a step further and suggested the provision of advance tax liability to arise only after the payment or declaration of dividend. This move is aimed to eliminate the uncertainty that arose with an estimation of dividend income by shareholders for paying tax in advance. Further, the Finance Ministry has also proposed that tax on dividend income may be deducted at the more beneficial treaty rate, for Foreign Portfolio Investors.
Infrastructure Development	The Budget has also allotted revenue towards the development of infrastructure around the country. 702 kms of conventional metro is already operational, added to another 1,016 kms of metros and RRTS that is under construction in 27 cities across the country. Metro rail systems and access will now be provided at affordable and decreased prices, to increase access through the development of two new technologies- ‘MetroNeo’ and ‘MetroLite’ in Tier-2 cities and certain areas of Tier-1 cities. This is expected to increase efficiency and safety.
Construction workers	With an increase in the importance accorded towards the unorganised labour sector, the Finance Ministry has further proposed to initiate and introduce a portal to collect information on construction-workers, buildings and gigs, particularly for migrant labourers. This will promote insurance, housing, health and food policies for these migrant workers.

Analysis

A close analysis of the afore-mentioned changes proposed by the Union Budget undeniably brings out the Government’s intention to assist, promote and facilitate development and growth in the real estate sector. The focus laid by the Government on Affordable Housing and its policies will undeniably cause growth in this sector. Additionally, the infrastructure initiatives in the Budget are also extremely beneficial and will provide a huge boost to the sector, allowing its growth and subsequent development.

However, the current Budget policies revolving around the real estate sector have failed to accord with the additional demand levels that were anticipated by the stakeholders of the industry in order to sustain the growing demand for housing. To facilitate growth, efficient execution and time-bound implementation are crucial. Persistent focus and attention according to the policy of ‘Minimum Government, Maximum Governance’ would promote the ease of doing business. The proposed level of expenditure on infrastructure by the Government on metro lines, roads, warehousing, ports, etc. is a move that is expected to give a boost to the economic GDP and hence, is commendable.

Conclusion

While the various measures proposed to be implemented in the real estate sector through the current Budget will positively impact an economy that is still grappling with the hit delivered by the COVID 19 pandemic, these changes and proposals also act as a mark of the industry’s transition from mere existence to actual growth.

References

1 Budget Speech | Union Budget. (indiabudget.gov.in)

2 Budget 2021: Analysis. (freepressjournal.in)

Photo by Fabian Blank on Unsplash

A close analysis of the afore–mentioned changes proposed by the Union Budget undeniably brings out the Government’s intention to assist, promote and facilitate development and growth in the real estate sector. The focus laid by the Government on Affordable Housing and its policies will undeniably cause growth in this sector. Additionally, the infrastructure initiatives in the Budget are also extremely beneficial and will provide a huge boost to the sector, allowing its growth and subsequent development.