Facts of the Case
The Revenue filed an appeal under Section 260A of the
Income-tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal
holding that Cricket Australia, a non-resident entity incorporated in Australia
and governing the sport of cricket in that country, was not liable to tax in
India on broadcast-related receipts as business income.
Cricket Australia had entered into agreements granting media
and broadcast rights in respect of cricket matches played in Australia to
Indian broadcasters. The matches were conducted outside India, and Cricket
Australia did not have any office, branch, or fixed place of business in India.
It also did not have any dependent agent in India authorised to conclude
contracts on its behalf.
The Assessing Officer sought to tax the receipts as business
income accruing or arising in India, alleging economic presence and commercial
exploitation of the Indian market. The CIT(A) and ITAT rejected this approach
and held that the receipts were taxable, if at all, only as royalty in
accordance with the India–Australia DTAA.
Issues Involved
Whether income received by Cricket Australia from grant of
broadcasting and media rights to Indian broadcasters constituted business
income taxable in India in the absence of a Permanent Establishment, or whether
such income was taxable only as royalty under the India–Australia Double
Taxation Avoidance Agreement.
Petitioner’s Arguments (Revenue)
The Revenue contended that Cricket Australia commercially
exploited the Indian market by permitting live telecast of cricket matches in
India, thereby earning substantial revenue from Indian broadcasters. It was
argued that such income had sufficient nexus with India and ought to be taxed
as business income under the Act. The Revenue further contended that the DTAA
did not prevent taxation of such income as business profits.
Respondent’s Arguments (Assessee)
Cricket Australia submitted that it had no Permanent
Establishment in India and carried out no business operations in India. It was
argued that the grant of broadcast rights constituted royalty under Article 12
of the India–Australia DTAA and that taxation was limited to the rate and
manner prescribed therein. In the absence of a Permanent Establishment, the
income could not be taxed as business profits under Article 7 of the DTAA.
Court Order / Findings
The Delhi High Court upheld the findings of the ITAT and held
that the receipts from grant of broadcast rights were in the nature of royalty
as defined under the India–Australia DTAA. The Court held that Cricket
Australia did not have any Permanent Establishment in India and that all
cricket matches were played outside India, with no business operations carried
out within Indian territory.
The Court observed that mere viewership or commercial
exploitation of broadcast rights in India does not constitute a Permanent
Establishment. In the absence of a PE, business income cannot be taxed under
Article 7 of the DTAA.
The Court rejected the Revenue’s attempt to characterise the
receipts as business income and affirmed that taxation must strictly follow the
treaty provisions. The Court relied upon settled jurisprudence governing
taxation of sports bodies and broadcasting rights, including earlier decisions
of the Delhi High Court on similar issues.
Important Clarification
The Court clarified that income arising from grant of
broadcasting rights by non-resident sports bodies is taxable in India only in
accordance with the applicable DTAA. In the absence of a Permanent
Establishment, such income cannot be taxed as business income merely because
Indian broadcasters or viewers are involved.
Final Outcome
The appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed. The Delhi High
Court held that Cricket Australia did not have a Permanent Establishment in
India and that income from grant of broadcast rights to Indian broadcasters was
taxable only as royalty under the India–Australia DTAA, subject to treaty
rates, and not as business income.
Link to download the order - https://www.mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1769841560_THEPRCOMMISSIONEROFINCOMETAXINTERNATIONALTAXATION1VsCRICKETAUSTRALIA.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