Latest Expert Exchange Queries
sitemapHome | Registration | Job Portal for CA's | Expert Exchange | Currency Converter | Post Matrimonial Ads | Post Property Ads
 
 
News shortcuts: From the Courts | News Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Service Tax | Sales Tax | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Indirect Tax | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing
 
 
 
 
Popular Search: cpt :: TAX RATES - GOODS TAXABLE @ 4% :: ACCOUNTING STANDARDS :: due date for vat payment :: ARTICLES ON INPUT TAX CREDIT IN VAT :: empanelment :: articles on VAT and GST in India :: Central Excise rule to resale the machines to a new company :: ICAI offer Get Windows 7,Office 2010 in Rs.799 Taxes :: ACCOUNTING STANDARD :: list of goods taxed at 4% :: form 3cd :: VAT Audit :: TDS :: VAT RATES
 
 
ę News Headlines »
 Securities excluded from GST ambit in revised Bill
 GST dilemma: Hope fades for new tax regime
 5nance.com launches tax investment platform
 Is government tapping your phone?
 Income tax department to use analytics to look for discrepancies in bank accounts
 GST Council fails to break deadlock over indirect tax regime, next meet on Dec 11 and 12 to hammer out differences
 Invoking Writ Jurisdiction For Income Tax Matters
 How to file income-tax returns online
 How Income Tax Returns Are Scrutinised
 All About New Income Disclosure Scheme to make Demonetisation successful
 Your deposit may draw income tax notice

SC rejects Foster's special leave plea against AAR order
September, 12th 2008

The Supreme Court has declined to entertain a Special Leave Petition by beer major Fosters Australia. The company was seeking to challenge an Authority for Advance Rulings (AAR) order that made it liable to pay tax in India after sale of Fosters Indias intellectual property rights, brand and trademark to UKs SABMiller.

The apex court asked Fosters Australia why it did not move the high court before filing the SLP.

Fosters India was the Indian unit of the Australian beer major. The latter had independently valued these intangible assets such as brand, trademark, goodwill and its licence to Fosters India to brew the brand, at about $90,000. Fosters Australia sold the Indian unit to global beer major SABMiller in 2006 for $120 million.

Following the apex courts directive declining the companys SLP, Fosters Australia sought permission to withdraw the petition which was then granted by SC. While allowing the withdrawal of SLP, the apex court asked the I-T department to suspend the assessment proceedings for two weeks to allow the party to move the HC.

Fosters Australia had raised the following issues before the AAR: whether sale of brand, trademark and brewing licence of Fosters India to SABMiller is liable to be taxed in India or not.

AAR said tax had to be paid in India on the income from the transfer of its right, title and Fosters brand under the Indian Income Tax Act. However, licence given by the Australian company to its Indian arm for brewing Fosters beer is not taxable in India.

The AAR ruling was a shot in the arm for the Indian tax authorities who wanted to tax all recent cross-border acquisitions of Indian companies by foreign parties, including Vodafones $11-billion takeover of Indian telecom major Hutch-Essar.

AARs reasoning for holding these intangible assets taxable is: The situs of Fosters India brand, trademark and goodwill had been associated with the companys Indian business, and therefore, the sale of these assets to SABMiller was liable to be taxed in India under the provisions of the Income Tax Act. Section 9(1) of the Income Tax Act provides for taxing income generated in India.

AAR did not accept the Australian company's argument that unlike other capital assets which can be geographically located, the situs of these intangible assets, like brand and trademark, have no particular geographical location, and therefore, no situs apart from the domicile of the owner.

AAR ruled the trademark and brand together with the goodwill they generated were assets situated in India when the transfer of ownership took place in 2006.

"It would be interesting to note that if the high court admits writ petition under Article 226, the disgruntled party may knock at the doors of the Supreme Court under Article 136 for redressel. It would be at the discretion of the apex court whether or not to entertain such application," said Daksha Baxi and Sanjay Sanghvi of Khaitan & Co.

They said such long-drawn exercise would result in more delays and the concept of Advance Ruling was brought in only to eliminate delay on such matters.

 
 
Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2016 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Publishing Management System PMS News Management System Publishing Management System Development Online News Management System for media company custom Publishing management system development Survey management system Market Res

Transfer Pricing | International Taxation | Business Consulting | Corporate Compliance and Consulting | Assurance and Risk Advisory | Indirect Taxes | Direct Taxes | Transaction Advisory | Regular Compliance and Reporting | Tax Assessments | International Taxation Advisory | Capital Structuring | Withholding tax advisory | Expatriate Tax Reporting | Litigation | Badges | Club Badges | Seals | Military Insignias | Emblems | Family Crest | Software Development India | Software Development Company | SEO Company | Web Application Development | MLM Software | MLM Solutions