Facts of the
Case
The petitioner, Nord Anglia Education Limited, is a
company incorporated in the United Kingdom and is engaged in providing
international education services globally. The petitioner has an Indian
subsidiary, Nord Anglia Education India Pvt. Ltd., to which it provides routine
management and administrative support services such as marketing and
communications, human resources, finance, IT, and corporate development. The
costs of such services are recovered on a strict cost-to-cost basis without any
markup.
The petitioner filed an application under Section
197 read with Section 195(3) of the Income-tax Act seeking issuance of a nil
withholding certificate in respect of payments proposed to be received from its
Indian affiliate. The Assessing Officer, by order dated 09.06.2025 and
certificate dated 30.07.2025, rejected the application and directed withholding
of tax at the rate of 15%, stating that determination of income at that stage
was premature and that deduction was necessary to protect the interest of
revenue.
Issues
Involved
Whether rejection of the nil withholding
certificate under Section 197 was justified without complying with the
mandatory requirements of Rule 28AA of the Income-tax Rules, whether managerial
support services are taxable as fees for technical services under Article 13 of
the India–UK DTAA, and whether the Assessing Officer could ignore binding ITAT
rulings in favour of the assessee for earlier assessment years.
Petitioner’s
Arguments
The petitioner contended that the services rendered
were purely managerial in nature and did not constitute fees for technical
services either under Section 9(1)(vii) of the Act or under Article 13 of the
India–UK DTAA, which requires that technical knowledge be “made available”. It
was submitted that the ITAT, in the petitioner’s own case for Assessment Years
2020-21 and 2021-22, had categorically held that similar services were not
taxable as FTS. The petitioner argued that the Assessing Officer mechanically
rejected the application without dealing with submissions, judicial precedents,
or ITAT orders, and failed to apply Rule 28AA, which mandates consideration of
past assessments and existing tax liabilities.
Respondent’s
Arguments
The Revenue contended that proceedings under
Section 197 are provisional and that issuance of a nil withholding certificate
would prejudice revenue interests. It was argued that the Revenue had not
accepted the ITAT orders for earlier years and had filed appellate and
rectification proceedings. The Revenue further submitted that principles of res
judicata do not apply to income-tax proceedings and that the Assessing Officer
was justified in directing withholding at 15% to safeguard revenue.
Court Order
/ Findings
The Delhi High Court held that while deciding an
application under Section 197, the Assessing Officer is statutorily bound to
comply with Rule 28AA, which requires consideration of estimated income,
assessed income of earlier years, existing tax liabilities, and advance tax or
TDS already paid. The Court found that the impugned order did not demonstrate
consideration of these mandatory factors, reflecting non-application of mind.
The Court further held that ITAT decisions for earlier
assessment years are binding on the Revenue unless stayed or set aside, and
mere filing of appeals does not render them inoperative, relying on the Supreme
Court decision in Kamlakshi Finance Corporation Ltd. The Court concluded that
rejection of the nil withholding certificate solely on the ground that
assessment was premature was untenable in law.
Important
Clarification
The High Court clarified that Rule 28AA is
mandatory and not directory, and Assessing Officers cannot bypass its
requirements on the ground of revenue protection. Orders passed under Section
197 must reflect due consideration of prior assessment history and binding
judicial precedents. Mechanical rejection of applications undermines the
statutory framework.
Final
Outcome
The writ petition was allowed. The impugned order
dated 09.06.2025 and certificate dated 30.07.2025 rejecting the nil withholding
certificate were quashed. The matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer with
a direction to reconsider the application afresh in accordance with Rule 28AA
and settled law, without being influenced by pending appeals against the ITAT
orders, and to complete the exercise within four weeks.
Link to download order https://www.mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1769504055_NORDANGLIAEDUCATIONLIMITEDVsDEPUTYCOMMISSIONEROFINCOMETAXCIRCLEINT.TAX222NEWDELHI.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