Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

"6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant materials on record. The reasons for our decisions are given below:
We find that (i) under the said IDC agreement, the appellant, essentially provides IT infrastructure management and mailbox/website hosting services to its Indian group companies; these IDC services are performed by the appellant's personnel in Singapore; the Indian group companies directly remit IDC service payments towards the appellant's bank account in Singapore, (ii) Page | 9 I.T.A. Nos.: 1693 & 1694/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Hartaj Sewa Singh.
IDC is an ISO 27001 certified data centre owned by Edenred Pte. and located in Singapore; IDC services are provided using the IDC and IT/security team in Singapore, (iii) the services under the IDC agreement comprise of administration and supervision of central infrastructure; mailbox hosting services and website hosting services, (iv) IDC services ensure 100% uptime for critical external facing applications which need highly secured web environment and dedicated team of security experts to ensure 100% uptime of security systems (firewall, anti virus, access controls) which are also hosted on server in Singapore.
We further observe that examples of websites/applications/softwares hosted by Indian group companies on the data centre in Singapore are web ordering application, corporate website, websites created for customers of Edenred India entities while making a loyalty program for them.
A perusal of the documents filed before the AO and DRP clearly indicate that
(i) appellant has an infrastructure data centre, not information centre at Singapore, (ii) the Indian group companies neither access nor use CPU of the appellant, (iii) no CDN system is provided under the IDC agreement, no such use/access is allowed, (iv) the appellant does not maintain any such central data (v) IDC is not capable of information analytics, data management, (vi) appellant only provides IDC service by using its hardware/security devices/personnel; all that the Indian group companies received are standard IDC services and not use of any software, (vii) bandwidth and networking infrastructure is used by the appellant to render IDC services; Indian companies only get the output of usages of such bandwith and network and not its use, (viii) consideration is for IDC services and not any specific program and (ix) no embedded/secret software is developed by the appellant.

brand ambassadors etc. across the internet. The applicant offered service on charging a subscription. The clients, who subscribe, can login to its website to do a search on what is being spoken about various brands and so on. The AAR held that the amount received from offering the particular subscription based service is taxable in India as royalty in terms of paragraph 2 of Article 12 of the DTAA between India & Singapore.

However, we find that in the instant case, the appellant is only providing IDC service which includes administration and supervision of central infrastructure, mailbox hosting services and website hosting services and therefore, the ratio laid down in the above ruling is not applicable to the facts of the appellants case.