No F1 race in India since 2013, but Formula One has to pay tax, says SC
- Wipro falls nearly 5% as brokerages cut target price on weak Q4 results
- A good competitor is good for HUL: Sanjiv Mehta
- Breaking taboos is becoming good for business in India
- Our core strategy is working and showing healthy growth: Wipro CEO Abidali Neemuchwala
- Contract manufacturers of global firms to launch own TV brands
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday held that Formula One World Championship (FOWC), which conducts Formula One car racing events, has a permanent establishment for its business in India and income accruing from it is taxable.
A permanent establishment (PE) is a fixed place of business, which generally gives rise to income or value-added tax liability in a particular jurisdiction.
“We have held that FOWC has PE in India and income that is attributable in India will be taxed. The amount that is to be taxed is to be assessed by an assessing officer,” said a Supreme Court bench consisting justices A.K. Sikri and Ashok Bhushan.
Advocate Ankur Saigal, who appeared for Jaypee Group, said that though the detailed judgement is awaited but the Supreme Court has held that an assessing officer will assess the income to be taxed.
Jaypee Group organized three Formula One races at its Buddh International Circuit at Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh, from 2011 to 2013 before the Indian Grand Prix ran into tax troubles with the state government. Jaypee Sports International Ltd had signed a five-year contract with Formula One Management (FOM) to host the championship in India.
FOWC has challenged last year’s Delhi high court judgement which had ruled that a payment by Jaiprakash Associates Ltd for the use of FOWC logos and symbols to promote the Grand Prix couldn’t be considered royalty and be taxed as such.
The high court had also ruled that FOWC has a permanent establishment in India for conducting its business and set aside the finding of the Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) on the issue. It had said the use of trademarks was “purely incidental” and as event organiser and host of the F1 Grand Prix Championship, Jaypee was bound to use the F1 marks, logos and devices.
FOWC and Jaypee group had approached the AAR to ascertain if the payment received by FOWC outside India from Jaypee could be considered royalty or not in terms of the double taxation avoidance agreement between the UK and Indian governments.
Another question for consideration before the AAR was whether FOWC had a permanent establishment for its business in India which it found that the payment was royalty and taxable and that Formula One did not have a permanent establishment in India.