Facts of the
Case
The petitioner, Lufthansa Cargo AG, a company
incorporated and tax resident of Germany, filed a writ petition challenging the
order dated 03.05.2024 passed under Section 195(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961,
whereby its application for issuance of a nil withholding tax certificate for
Financial Year 2024–25 was rejected. The petitioner also challenged the
certificate dated 17.05.2024 issued under Section 197 of the Act, which
permitted withholding tax at a reduced rate of 0.10 percent instead of nil
rate.
The petitioner is engaged in the business of
international cargo handling and transportation of cargo through operation of
aircrafts in international traffic. Its services are procured through agents
registered with the International Air Transport Association (IATA), who
generate airway bills and arrange cargo transportation. The petitioner claimed
that its income from such operations is exempt from tax in India under Article
8 of the India–Germany Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement.
The petitioner applied electronically on 14.02.2024
in Form 15D seeking a nil withholding tax certificate under Section 195(3). The
Assessing Officer rejected the application on the ground that the petitioner
had not furnished sufficient material to qualify under Section 195(3) read with
Rule 29B. Subsequently, on an application under Section 197, the Assessing
Officer issued a certificate allowing withholding tax at a reduced rate of 0.10
percent.
Issues
Involved
Whether the petitioner was entitled to a nil
withholding tax certificate under Sections 195(3) and 197 in respect of income
from international air cargo operations exempt under Article 8 of the
India–Germany DTAA, and whether the rejection of the nil certificate and
issuance of a reduced-rate certificate was arbitrary and unsustainable.
Petitioner’s
Arguments
The petitioner contended that its income was
generated solely from operation of aircrafts in international traffic and was
squarely exempt from taxation in India under Article 8 of the DTAA. It was
argued that there was no ambiguity regarding the nature of services rendered or
the character of income.
The petitioner pointed out that it had been
regularly filing returns of income in India for more than fourteen years and
had consistently been granted nil withholding tax certificates under Sections
195(3) or 197, except for Financial Year 2019–20, where denial of nil
certificate was set aside by the Delhi High Court in earlier proceedings and
the certificate was eventually granted at nil rate. It was submitted that there
was no change in facts, services or legal position in the relevant year.
Respondents’
Arguments
The Revenue contended that the petitioner had
failed to furnish adequate financial statements and details to establish
eligibility under Section 195(3) and that there was a likelihood of income
arising which could be taxable in India. It was further submitted that issuance
of a reduced-rate certificate was done as a protective measure to safeguard the
interest of the Revenue.
Court Order
/ Findings
The Delhi High Court held that the impugned order
rejecting the application under Section 195(3) could not be sustained. The
Court noted that there was no dispute regarding the nature of services rendered
by the petitioner and that the Revenue had not controverted the petitioner’s
assertion that its income from international cargo operations was exempt under
Article 8 of the DTAA.
The Court observed that the petitioner had
consistently been granted nil withholding tax certificates for more than a
decade and that even for Financial Year 2019–20, the denial of nil certificate
had been set aside and the certificate was ultimately issued at nil rate. The
Court found that there was no material change in facts or law to justify a
different approach for Financial Year 2024–25.
The Court further held that the Assessing Officer
had failed to provide any cogent reasons for issuing a certificate at a reduced
rate of 0.10 percent instead of nil rate. In the absence of any dispute
regarding chargeability of income, such an approach was arbitrary.
Considering that the financial year was nearing
completion, the Court declined to remand the matter and instead directed
issuance of a nil withholding tax certificate under Section 197.
Important
Clarification
The Court clarified that issuance of a nil
withholding tax certificate under Section 197 does not preclude the Assessing
Officer from examining, during assessment proceedings, whether any part of the
petitioner’s income is chargeable to tax in India. However, such examination
must be carried out independently and uninfluenced by the grant of the
certificate.
Final
Outcome
The writ petition was allowed. The Delhi High Court
set aside the order rejecting the application under Section 195(3) and the
certificate dated 17.05.2024 issued under Section 197 permitting withholding
tax at 0.10 percent, and directed the Revenue to issue a certificate for nil
withholding tax in favour of Lufthansa Cargo AG for Financial Year 2024–25.
Pending applications were disposed of accordingly.
Link to download order - https://www.mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1769686366_LUFTHANSACARGOAGVsASSISTANTCOMMISSIONEROFINCOMETAXORS..pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools
0 Comments
Leave a Comment