Formula One income accruing from permanent establishment

Image
Press Trust of India New Delhi
Last Updated : Apr 24 2017 | 9:42 PM IST
The Supreme Court today held that Formula One World Championship (FOWC) which conducts Formula One car racing events, has a permanent establishment (PE) 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," a bench of Justices A K Sikri and Ashok Bhushan said.
Advocate Ankur Saigal, who appeared for Jaypee Group, said that though the detailed judgement is awaited but the apex court has held that an assessing officer will assess the income to be taxed.
Jaypee Group, in association with others, has organised Formula One car races in Greater Noida, adjacent to national capital in the past few years.
The first edition of the championship took place on October 30, 2011. Jaypee Sports International Limited is the organiser of Formula One racing in India and has signed a five-year contract with Formula One Management (FOM) to host the championship in India.
The event did not take place in 2014 and since then because of an ongoing tax dispute with the Uttar Pradesh government, the event has not been held.
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.

Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content

*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: Apr 24 2017 | 9:42 PM IST

Next Story