Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Essence of the transaction was a change in the controlling interest of HEL, which constituted a source of income in India Transaction had significant nexus with India; hence withholding tax provisions applicable Several other rights transferred besides the CGP share - the consideration should be allocated over such rights also
Cayman Islands
+ Options over the indirect shareholding of 15% of Other Indian entities in HEL = Economic interest of 67 percent (approx) in HEL transferred to Vodafone
Vodafone | 2
Vodafone | 3
Question before the Supreme Court of India (SC) Whether capital gains arise from the sale by a non-resident of the share capital of CGP, a foreign entity, which held underlying Indian assets?
HOLDING STRUCTURES
Vodafone Revenue In the absence of fraud, India to respect corporate identity and corporate veil cannot be lifted (unless the law is specifically provides so) Regulatory provisions mandate investment in telecom sector only through a corporate structure; it could not be disregarded by lifting of corporate veil Existing provisions to be construed purposively
SC
Words indirectly and through appearing in section 9 do not make transaction taxable, unless capital asset situated in India (in this case the Cayman Islands Companys share was situated outside India)
In a transaction between two foreign entities source of income cannot be traced back to India to establish nexus with India Section 9 to be construed in a wide manner; intent of the transaction to be seen Consideration paid for property rights in India which created a source of income from India Situs of CGP share can only be in India as the entire business purpose of holding that share was to assume control in Indian telecom operations, the same was managed through board of directors controlled by HTIL
All rights reserved | Preliminary & Tentative
Revenue
Vodafone | 5
Vodafone | 6
Revenue SC
Complex corporate structure evolved for good commercial reasons, recognized by Indian tax and regulatory laws
CGP share was interposed at the last minute to avoid tax in India Principle of internal correlation: Every multinational company reconfigures itself into a corporate group by dividing itself into a number of subsidiaries which are financially interlinked Court(s) have evolved doctrines like piercing the corporate veil, substance over form etc; however, genuine tax planning cannot be ruled against by the Court(s) CGP was an investment vehicle; sale of shares of CGP was more efficient way of ensuring a smooth transition of business. It cannot, therefore, be said that CGP had no business or commercial purpose
All rights reserved | Preliminary & Tentative
Vodafone | 7
Revenue SC
Controlling interest in the management of the company - not an identifiable or distinct capital asset independent of the holding of shares Tax is to be levied on the transaction ie share sale and not on its effect Method or basis of valuation of shares cannot be a basis of taxation
Vodafone | 8
Options entitling Vodafone to 15 percent indirect holding in HEL do not constitute a property right or equity interest until exercised
Vodafone | 9
Revenue
SC
There is no conflict between McDowell and ABA and the latter did not require any reconsideration Court(s) not compelled to look at a document or transaction in isolation and the legal nature of the transaction should be discerned by looking at the entire transaction as a whole and not by adopting a dissecting approach the look at approach guidance taken from English cases
Vodafone | 10
SC
Vodafone | 11
WITHHOLDING TAX
Vodafone Section 195, referring to withholding from payments to non-residents, cannot be enforced on a non-resident not having any taxable presence in India The words any person in section 195 should be used sensibly, else the enforcement of the provision would be impossible In the absence of income chargeable to tax, tax not required to be withheld
Revenue
Once the nexus is shown to exist, the provisions would operate SC Applicability of section 195 depends on the tax presence of the non-resident payer in India - tax presence must be construed in the context of the transaction under question Per Justice Radhakrishnan section 195 does not apply to non resident payors; does not have extra territorial applicability
Vodafone | 12
Vodafone | 13
Tax policy certainty is crucial for taxpayers (including foreign investors) to make rational economic choices in the most efficient manner
Vodafone | 14
BMR ANALYSIS
Binding nature of the concurring but separate judgment of Justice Radhakrishnan Substance vs form - will TRC remain a conclusive proof of residency? Future for Mauritius investors Applicability of withholding tax provisions in future M&A/Private Equity deals
Provisions of the DTC relating to indirect transfers a game changer? What to expect in the Finance Bill, 2012?
Vodafone | 15
Challenge Us