Circular on Conditions
relevant to identify Development Centres engaged in Contract R&D Services
with Insignificant Risk
Circular No.06
/2013, [F No. 500/139/2012], dated 29.06.2013
(amending
Circular No.03/2013 dated 26th March, 2013)
It has been
brought to the notice of CBDT that there is divergence of views amongst the
field officers and taxpayers regarding the functional profile of development
centres engaged in contract R&D services for the purposes of determining
arm’s length price/transfer pricing. In some cases, while taxpayers insist that
they are contract R&D service providers with insignificant risk, the TPOs
treat them as full or significant risk-bearing entities and make transfer
pricing adjustments accordingly. The issue has been examined in the CBDT.
The Research and
Development Centres set up by foreign companies can be classified into three
broad categories based on functions, assets and risk assumed by the centre established
in India. These are:
1. Centres which
are entrepreneurial in nature;
2. Centres which
are based on cost-sharing arrangements; and
3.
Centres
which undertake contract research and development.
While the three
categories are not water-tight compartments, it is possible to distinguish them
based on functions, assets and risk. It will be obvious that in the first case
the Development Centre performs significantly important functions and assumes
substantial risks. In the third case, it will be obvious that the functions,
assets and risk are minimal. The second case falls between the first and the
third cases.
More often than
not, the assessee claims that the Development Centre in India must be treated
as a contract R&D service provider with insignificant risk. Consequently,
the assessee claims that in such cases the Transactional Net Margin Method
(TNMM) must be adopted as the most appropriate method.
The CBDT has
carefully considered the matter and lays down the following guidelines for identifying
the Development Centre as a contract R&D service provider with
insignificant risk.
1. Foreign
principal performs most of the economically significant functions involved in research
or product development cycle either through its own employees or through its
associated enterprises while the Indian Development Centre carries out the work
assigned to it by the foreign principal. Economically significant functions
would include critical functions such as conceptualization and design of the
product and providing the strategic direction and framework;
2. The foreign
principal or its associated enterprise(s) provides funds/ capital and other economically
significant assets including intangibles for research or product development.
The foreign principal or its associated enterprise(s) also provides a remuneration
to the Indian Development Centre for the work carried out by the latter;
3. The Indian
Development Centre works under the direct supervision of the foreign principal
or its associated enterprise which has not only the capability to control or supervise
but also actually controls or supervises research or product development through
its strategic decisions to perform core functions as well as monitor activities
on regular basis;
4. The Indian
Development Centre does not assume or has no economically significant realized
risks. If a contract shows that the foreign principal is obligated to control
the risk but the conduct shows that the Indian Development Centre is doing so,
then the contractual terms are not the final determinant of actual activities;
5. In the case of
a foreign principal being located in a country/ territory widely perceived as a
low or no tax jurisdiction, it will be presumed that the foreign principal is
not controlling the risk. However, the Indian Development Centre may rebut this
presumption to the satisfaction of the revenue authorities. Low tax
jurisdiction shall mean any country or territory notified in this behalf under
section 94A of the Act or any other country or territory that may be notified
for the purpose of Chapter X of the Act;
6. Indian
Development Centre has no ownership right (legal or economic) on the outcome of
the research which vests with the foreign principal and that this is evident from
the contract as well as from the conduct of the parties.
The Assessing
Officer or the Transfer Pricing Officer, as the case may be, shall have regard to
the guidelines above and shall take a decision based on the totality of the
facts and circumstances of the case. In doing so, the Assessing Officer or the
Transfer Pricing Officer, as the case may be, shall be guided by the conduct of
the parties and not merely by the terms of the contract.
The Assessing
Officer or the Transfer Pricing Officer, as the case may be, shall bear in mind
the provisions of section 92C of the Act and Rule 10A to Rule 10C of the Rules.
He shall also apply the guidelines enumerated above and select the ‘most
appropriate method’.
The above may be
brought to the notice of all concerned.
0 comments:
Post a Comment