Amadeus IT Group SA v. ACIT (2022) 197 ITD 330 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 9(1)(i) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Business connection-Permanent Establishment-Agency PE-Computer information system (CRS)-Computer, electronic hardware / software and connectivity is provided through third party nodes located in India-Constitute PE of and income arising from airlines and travel agents is attributable to activities of PE in India and taxable in India-Income attributable to assessee’s PE in India was to be determined at 15 per cent instead of 75 per cent as determined by AO.-Royalties / Fees for technical services-CRS and ARS was installed at airport which could be accessed only by airlines, payments made in relation to ARS could not be characterised as royalty either under section 9 or under India-Spain DTAA-DTAA-India-Spain. [S. 9(1)(vi), 9(1)(vii), Art. 5, 13]

Assessee-company, tax resident of Spain, developed a computer information system (CRS) which facilitated reservations, communications, ticketing and related functions on a world wide basis to airlines and travel agencies. Assessee entered into agreement with various airlines and provided connectivity between individual airlines and CRS created by assessee through its Indian AE. Assessing Officer held that computers provided to subscribers through which sales were constituted amounted to fixed place PE of assessee in India and since Indian AE was functionally dependent upon assessee it also constituted agency PE in India. Held that  computer, electronic hardware/software and connectivity provided by assessee to travel agents through third party nodes located in India would constitute PE of assessee in India, accordingly the  income arising to assessee from airlines and travel agents was attributable to activities of PE in India and taxable in India. Considering nature and extent of activities in India and abroad and assets employed and risk assumed, profit attributable to bookings from India  Income attributable to assessee’s PE in India was to be determined at 15 per cent instead of 75 per cent as determined by AO. Held that software was not available outside Indian airport or to any of agents of assessee  since agents were booking tickets only through CRS and ARS was installed at airport which could be accessed only by airlines, payments made in relation to ARS could not be characterised as royalty either under section 9 or under India-Spain DTAA. (AY. 2017-18, 2018-19,  2019-20)