Subscribe to the Bombay Chartered Accountant Journal Subscribe Now!

July 2009

On facts, the assessee is an employer responsible for tax deduction u/s.192.

By Jagdish D. Shah, Jagdish T. Punjabi, Chartered Accountants
Reading Time 3 mins
fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 2


Part C — Tribunal & International Tax Decisions






  1. Dolphin Drilling Ltd. v.
    ACIT



[2009] 121 TTJ (Del.) 433

S. 10(6)(viii), S. 40(a)(i), S. 40(a)(iii), S. 192, S. 195,
Income-tax Act

A.Y. : 2004-2005. Dated : 30-1-2009

Issue :

  • On facts,
    the assessee is an employer responsible for tax deduction u/s.192.

  • Amount paid to non-resident
    towards reimbursement of employees’ salaries disbursed as an agent is not
    subject to tax withholding u/s.195.




 


Facts :

The assessee was a UK company (‘UKCo’). UKCo had entered
into a contract with ONGC to charter duly manned deep water drilling rig
together. UKCo entered into contract with another group company in Norway for
procuring crew to operate the drillship. As per the agreement with the
Norwegian company, the Norwegian company was to procure/supply crew. Norwegian
company was to disburse the salary of the crew. UKCo was to, reimburse the
salary of the crew and also pay 5% of the reimbursed amount as handling fee to
the Norwegian company.

 

Additionally, UKCo also paid fixed fees to Norway Company
towards meeting personnel, office, administration and other costs. The crew
were employees of UKCo. UKCo had issued appointment letters to the crew and
UKCo was responsible to secure work permits and security passes for crew as
well as to provide housing and transportation to crew. UKCo also deducted tax
at source u/s.192 of the Act from the income of the crew after considering
exemption u/s.10(6)(viii) of the Act and deposited the same with the
Government.

 

UKCo deducted tax u/s.195 on the fixed fee and the handling
fee paid to Norwegian company.

 

The AO held that the amount reimbursed by UKCo to Norwegian
company for disbursement of crew salaries was ‘fees for technical services’
and hence, tax should have been deducted u/s.195 on the entire amount. Since
the tax was not deducted, the AO disallowed the payment u/s.40(a)(i) of the
Act.

On appeal, CIT(A) confirmed the order of the AO.

 

Held :

The Tribunal held that the obligation for payment of
salaries to the crew was of UKCo and Norwegian company disbursed the salaries
only for the convenience of the parties.

 

The reimbursement of crew salaries was chargeable under the
head ‘Salaries’ and hence, the payments would not be covered u/s.40(a)(i) but
would be covered by S. 40(a)(iii). Since S. 10(6)(viii) exempts remuneration
for employment on a foreign ship if total stay in India does not exceed 90
days, tax would not be deductible in case of employees whose stay did not
exceed 90 days.


You May Also Like