The Commissioner Of Income Tax - Internationaltaxation -3 v. Radisson Hotel Interactionincorporated

Signature Not Verified $~37 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI +ITA 441/2022 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - INTERNATIONALTAXATION -3..... AppellantThrough:Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Senior StandingCounselforRevenuewithMs.Mansie Jain, Advocate. versus RADISSON HOTEL INTERACTIONINCORPORATED ..... Respondent Through:None. %Date of Decision: 10[th]November, 2022 CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHANHON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA J U D G M E N T MANMOHAN, J (Oral): 1.Present Income Tax Appeal has been filed challenging the order dated29[th]April, 2022 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (‘ITAT’) inITA No. 9265/Del./2019 for Assessment Year 2016-17. 2.Learned Counsel for the Appellant states that the ITAT has erred inholding that the entire payments received by the Assessee from its IndianCustomers on account of Centralized Services viz. sales and marketing,loyalty programs, reservation service, technological service, operationalservices and training programs/human resources do not constitute ‘Fee forTechnical Services’ as defined under Section 9(l)(vii) of the Income Tax ITA 441/2022 Signature Not Verified Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’) or 'Fee for included services’ as defined under Articles12(4) (a) of the Indo-US DTAA. 3.He submits that the ITAT has allowed the appeals of the Assesseesfollowing the judgement of this Court in Director of Income Tax v.Sheraton International Inc (2009) 178 taxman 84 (Del). He, however,states that the said decision of this Court has not been accepted by theRevenue and an appeal has been preferred against the same, which ispending adjudication before the Supreme Court being CA No. 3094/2010. 4.Admittedly,thisCourtin SheratonInternationalInc. (supra) has decided the issue involved in the present appeal in favour ofthe Assessee. The counsel for the Revenue has not brought anything onrecord to distinguish the facts of present case from the facts of SheratonInternational Inc. (supra) case. 5.Also, this Court vide judgment dated 4[th]November, 2022 in ITA Nos.434/2022 and 435/2022 dismissed the appeals of the Revenue arising out ofthe same common impugned order. 6.Though the judgment of this Court in Sheraton InternationalInc. (supra) has been challenged and is pending adjudication before theSupreme Court, yet there is no stay of the said judgment till date.Consequently, in view of the judgments passed by the Supreme Courtin Kunhayammed and Others vs. State of Kerala and Another, (2000) 6SCC 359 and Shree Chamundi Mopeds Ltd. Vs. Church of South IndiaTrust Association CSI Cinod Secretariat, Madras (1992) 3 SCC 1, thepresent appeal is covered by the judgment passed by the learned predecessorDivision Bench in Sheraton International Inc. (supra). ITA 441/2022 Page 2 of 3 Signature Not Verified 7.Accordingly, no substantial question of law arises for consideration inthe present appeal and the same is dismissed. However, it is clarified that theorders passed in the present appeal shall abide by the final decision of theSupreme Court in the aforesaid Civil Appeal. MANMOHAN, J MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J NOVEMBER 10, 2022msh ITA 441/2022 Page 3 of 3