India: Taxability of procurement activities undertaken by a liaison office

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Garden, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

India: Taxability of procurement activities undertaken by a liaison office

The Authority for Advance Rulings (AAR) in the case of Columbia Sportswear Company [2011-TII-21-ARA-INTL], adjudicated on the taxability of procurement activity undertaken by a non-resident company through its liaison office (LO) in India.

The taxpayer, a US company (US Co) engaged in worldwide wholesaling and retailing of outdoor apparel, set up a LO in India to act as a liaison for the purchase of the goods in India. The LO also assisted the US Co in procuring goods from Egypt and Bangladesh. The Indian Tax Law (ITL) provides for an exemption from income attributable to business operations in India, where the activity of a nonresident is limited to purchase of goods for the purpose of export (purchase exclusion). Also, under most tax treaties, a place of business maintained solely for the purpose of purchasing goods, or activities that are preparatory or auxiliary in nature, does not create a taxable presence/permanent establishment (PE) for the non-resident enterprise. The issue before the AAR was to determine whether the LO of US Co would come within the purview of the purchase exclusion under the ITL or not create a PE under the applicable India-US tax treaty. Based on the facts of the case, the AAR observed that the activities of the LO are not used solely for purchasing goods, but it is practically involved in all the activities connected with the business of the US Co. The worldwide outdoor apparel business of the US Co broadly covered: designing; purchasing of raw material; getting goods manufactured; selling the goods. Other than the actual function of sale, all the other activities of US Co are conducted by the LO. Further, the LO is also engaged in carrying out similar activities for US Co in other countries. Since the LOs activities are not limited to the purchase of goods in India for the purpose of export, the purchase exclusion would not apply under the ITL. Under the treaty, the activity profile of the LO cannot be termed as preparatory or auxiliary to US Co's business, nor can the LO be a place of business solely for the purpose of purchasing goods. Therefore, the LO would create a PE in India for US Co. Accordingly, the income attributable to US Co's operations in India from the business of designing, manufacturing and selling the products imported, would be taxable in India in accordance with the provisions of the tax treaty.

Rajendra Nayak (rajendra.nayak@in.ey.com) & Ganesh Pai (ganesh.pai@in.ey.com)

Ernst & Young

Tel: +91 80 2224 5646

Fax: +91 80 2224 0695

Website: www.ey.com

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

While pillar two has been enacted on paper in Brazil, companies are encountering a range of practical compliance issues, ITR has heard
Moore, founding partner of the Chicago tax boutique which bears her name, shares her career wisdom for ITR’s new Women in Tax interview series
But partners at the firm admit that jumping ship to the US would not be as easy as some believe
Governments are rewriting tax policy for the AI era, deploying digital taxes, tailored incentives and algorithmic enforcement that redefine where value is created
Wingrove will succeed Bill Thomas, who has served in the role since 2017; in other news, Andersen unveiled a sharp increase in revenues for 2025
Partners are divided on Italy vs PDM D’s analytical depth, evidentiary standards, and what the judgment signals for future intra-group financing cases
As GCCs increasingly become strategic hubs, multinationals face heightened risks around permanent establishment and place of effective management
While all options presented ‘drawbacks’, European Commission tax leader Wopke Hoekstra said the controversial US carve-out deal has ‘many benefits’
From tech preparations to competitiveness concerns, Tax Systems’ Russell Gammon addresses the most pressing client considerations arising from the SbS deal
Despite estimates that the US/OECD agreement will cost countries billions, the Fair Tax Foundation’s Paul Monaghan believes the deal is a ‘necessary evil’
Gift this article