MACT | Fraud Vitiates All Judicial Acts, Even Without Specific Review Powers: Rajasthan High Court    |     Right of Private Defense Cannot Be Weighed in Golden Scales: Madhya Pradesh High Court Acquits Appellant in Culpable Homicide Case    |     Pre-Arrest Bail Not a Right but an Exception: Himachal High Court Denied Bail In Dowry Death Case"    |     Service Law | Similarly Situated Employees Cannot Be Denied Equal Treatment: PH High Court Orders Regularization    |     Presumption of Innocence Remains Supreme Unless Clearly Overturned: PH High Court Affirming Acquittal    |     Any Physical Liaison with A Girl Of Less Than Eighteen Years Is A Strict Offense.: Patna High Court Reiterates Strict Stance On Sexual Offences Against Minors    |     Orissa High Court Rules Res Judicata Inapplicable When Multiple Appeals Arise from Same Judgment    |     Mandatory Section 80 Notice Cannot Be Bypassed Lightly:  Jammu & Kashmir High Court Returns Plaint for Non-Compliance    |     Bombay High Court Denies Permanent Lecturer Appointment for Failing to Meet UGC Eligibility Criteria at Time of Appointment    |     Deferred Cross-Examination Gave Time for Witness Tampering, Undermining Fair Trial: Allahabad High Court    |     Dowry Death | Presumption Under Section 113-B Not Applicable as No Proof of Cruelty Soon Before Death : Supreme Court    |     Land Acquisition | Jaiprakash Associates Ltd. (JAL) Liable for Compensation under Supplementary Award, Not Ultra-Tech Cement Ltd.: Supreme Court    |     Non-Mentioning of Bail Orders in Detention Reflects Clear Non-Application of Mind: J&K High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Order    |     Conviction Under Arms Act and Criminal Conspiracy Quashed Due to Non-Seizure of Key Evidence and Failure to Prove Ownership of Box: Jharkhand High Court    |    

For a Payment to Qualify as 'Fees for Technical Services' Under DTAA, It Must Entail Specialized, Customized, and Exclusive Technical Service  - Delhi High Court Quashes Order Against SFDC Ireland Limited

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Delhi High Court, in a landmark judgment dated March 11, 2024, quashed the order and certification dated October 16 and 18, 2023, respectively, by the Commissioner of Income Tax, which denied a Nil withholding tax certificate to SFDC Ireland Limited. The Court remitted the matter for a fresh evaluation, focusing on whether the remittances constituted consideration for technical services under the India-Ireland Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA).

Legal Point: The central legal issue revolved around the interpretation of "Fee for Technical Services" under Section 197 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in relation to payments received by SFDC Ireland Limited from salesforce.com India Private Limited.

Facts and Issues: SFDC Ireland, engaged in providing cloud-based customer management platforms, entered into a Reseller Agreement with SFDC India. The payments received were subject to an application for a Nil withholding tax certificate, which was denied by the Commissioner, categorizing the remittances as 'Fee for Technical Services' under the DTAA.

Court’s Assessment: The Court meticulously examined the nature of services provided by SFDC Ireland and its relationship with SFDC India. It emphasized that for a payment to qualify as 'Fees for Technical Services' under the DTAA, it must entail specialized, customized, and exclusive technical service. The training and assistance provided were aligned more with enabling SFDC India to understand and market the products rather than being technical services.

Decision: The High Court instructed a fresh consideration of SFDC Ireland’s application, with an emphasis on the nature of technical services and the revenue structure of SFDC India. It was held that the denial of a Nil withholding tax certificate lacked a thorough examination of whether the remittances were indeed consideration for technical services.

Date of Decision: March 11, 2024

SFDC Ireland Limited vs Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr

Similar News