आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण िद(cid:671)ी पीठ “डी ”, िद(cid:671)ी

(cid:373)ी िवकास अव(cid:830)थी, (cid:586)ाियक सद(cid:735) एवं

(cid:373)ी नवीन चं(cid:363), लेखाकार सद(cid:735) के सम(cid:407)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “D”, DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER &

SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आअसं.3540/िद(cid:671)ी/2023 (िन.व. 2021-22)

ITA No.3540/DEL/2023 (A.Y.2021-22)

Keller Asia Pacific Ltd., 18 Boon Lay Way, No. 4, 104 Tradehub 21, Singapore, 609966 PAN: AAGCK5505R ...... अपीलाथ(cid:7278)/Appellant बनाम Vs.

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle International Taxation-2(1)(2) ..... (cid:7079)ितवादी/Respondent Civic Centre, New Delhi 110002 अपीलाथ(cid:334) (cid:554)ारा/ Appellant by : Shri Ashik Shah, CA (cid:366)ितवादी(cid:554)ारा Respondent by : Ms. Anjula Jain, CIT-DR /

सुनवाई क(cid:7409) ितिथ/ Date of hearing : 03/06/2025 घोषणा क(cid:7409) ितिथ/ Date of pronouncement : : 26/08/2025 आदशे /ORDER PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM:

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the assessment order dated

12.10.2023 passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 144C(13) of the Income Tax Act 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for assessment year 2021-22.

2. Shri Ashik Shah, appearing on behalf of the assessee submitted at the outset that he is not pressing ground no. 1 to 3 of appeal. The only ground assailed by the assessee is ground no 4, relating to taxability of management fees as Fee for Technical Services (FTS).

2.1. Narrating facts of the case, he submitted that the assessee was incorporated in Singapore and is a tax resident of Singapore. The assessee is providing ground engineering services used in construction of buildings. The assessee entered into Management Services Agreement with various Keller Group entities in Asia Pacific Region including Keller Ground Engineering India Pvt. Ltd. (Keller India). The Management Services Agreement dated 01.01.2016 is at pages 117 to 131 of paper book. The services provided by the assessee to its Indian AE are given in Schedule 1 to said agreement at page no. 126 & 127. In lieu of providing services, the assessee receives management fee from Keller India. The services are in nature of strategic management consultancy services, legal services, engineering & technical advice, marketing & advertising services, human capital, procurement and I.T services. Except for I.T services, none of the services provided by assessee to Indian AE qualify ‘make available’ clause. The revenue from I.T Services was offered to tax by the assessee suo-motto. The assessee is rendering these services since 2016. The AO holds management fee as FTS on the presumption that the assessee is making available Technical Knowledge Skill, etc to its AE. In preceding assessment years, the AO made addition for similar reasons. The assessee carried the issue in appeal before the Tribunal. However, the appeals of the assessee were allowed on the technical issue of DIN. Hence, this is the first year for adjudication of the issue on merits.

2.2 Aggrieved by the draft Assessment Order dated 28.12.2022, the assessee filed objections before the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP). The DRP without appreciating the facts upheld findings of the AO in draft Assessment Order.The ld. AR of assessee contended that assessee is giving his expert opinion/advice and is not transferring any technology or know-how. The assessee is providing services through emails. The AO has erred in assuming that the assessee has transferred technology or know-how over the period of time. He referred to the observations of the AO, in para 11 of assessment order, wherein the AO has remarked that, ‘technical skill if made available for a longer period of time, the customers gain the technical knowledge of resolving that issue in future independently’. The ld. AR asserted that said observations are without any basis and are arising from assumptions and presumptions of the AO. Nowhere in the assessment order the AO has given any finding based on document