The Commissioner Of Income Tax - Internationaltaxation -3 v. Starwood Hotel And Resorts Worldwide Inc

$~41 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI +ITA 456/2022 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - INTERNATIONALTAXATION -3..... Appellant ..... Appellant Through:Mr.Ruchir Bhatia, Sr.StandingCounsel for the Revenue. versus STARWOOD HOTEL AND RESORTS WORLDWIDE INC. ..... RespondentThrough:Mr.Divyanshu Agrawal, Advocate. Through: Date of Decision: 16[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: 1.Present Income Tax Appeal has been filed challenging the orderdated 29[th]April, 2022 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal(‘ITAT’) in ITA No. 2011/Del./2019 for the Assessment Year 2015-16. 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 for Technical Services’ as defined under Section 9(l)(vii) of the Income TaxAct, 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 Assesseefollowing the judgement of this Court in Director of Income Taxv. 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 Sheraton InternationalInc. (supra) has decided the issue involved in the present appeal in favour ofthe Assessee. The counsel for the Revenue has not brought anything onrecordtodistinguishthefactsofpresentcasefromthefactsof Sheraton International Inc. (supra) case. 5.Also, this Court vide judgment dated 4[th]November, 2022 in ITANos. 434/2022 and 435/2022 dismissed the appeals of the Revenue arisingout of the 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) 6 SCC 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). 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 theorder 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, JNOVEMBER 16, 2022KA