CBDT issues Guidance on Mutual Agreement Procedure (MAP) for the benefit of CAs of India, Taxpayers, Tax Authorities and Treaty Partners

Mutual Agreement Procedure(MAP) Guidance:-

India has a huge system of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements ('DTAAs' or 'Assessment Treaties', hereinafter) with different nations. The DTAAs, interalia, give rules and instruments to allotment of burdening rights among the arrangement accomplices; shirking of financial and juridical twofold tax collection; and goal of tax assessment not as per the deal through the Mutual Agreement Procedure ('MAP', hereinafter).

Rule 44G of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 has been notified recently vide S.R.282 (E) dated 6thMay, 2020. This rule substitutes the previous rules 44G and 44H, which dealt with the same issue of implementation of MAP.

The rule gives, inter alia, the procedures to be trailed by the skillful authority(ies) ('CA' or 'CAs' hereinafter)of India till the goal of the issue of tax assessment not as per the deal and the procedures to be trailed by the field specialists to actualize the result of the MAP. The new principle is pertinent w.e.f sixth May, 2020 and, appropriately, applies to all MAP cases pending with the CAs of India as on sixth May, 2020.

Despite the fact that past guidelines 44G and 44H were in presence for various years, detailed information data in regards to MAP procedures and direction on issues identified with such procedures were not accessible in a thorough and solidified way.

The Action 14 last report on "Making Dispute Resolution More Effective", of the Base Erosion and Profit Shifting ('BEPS', hereinafter) task of the G-20 and OECD nations, had suggested that all nations that execute the BEPS bundle of measures must distribute exhaustive MAP direction.

In view of the above, the Board has decided to issue this MAP guidance for the benefit of taxpayers, tax practitioners, tax authorities, and CAs of India and of treaty partners.

The MAP direction is introduced in the accompanying four sections:

1. Part A: Introduction and Basic Information;
2. Part B: Access and Denial of Access to MAP;
3. Part C: Technical Issues; and
4. Part D: Implementation of MAP outcomes.

PART A

Introduction and basic information:-

Mutual Agreement Procedure

Mutual Agreement Procedure (MAP) is an other expense debate goal component accessible to the citizens under the DTAAs for settling questions offering ascend to twofold tax collection or tax assessment not as per DTAAs. Guide can help in soothing twofold tax collection either completely or incompletely. Practically all DTAAs went into by India have the MAP Article and it gives an extra debate goal instrument to citizens notwithstanding those accessible under the residential laws of India. A citizen can demand for help under MAP paying little mind to the cures gave under the Indian household law.

MAP empowers the CAs of India to connect with the CAs of other settlement accomplices and is a procedure which encourages conversations and arrangements between both deal accomplices as they attempt to determine worldwide duty debates, which are not as per the important DTAAs.

At present, India has two CAs for MAP cases and they are senior officials in Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance (Joint Secretary, FT and TR-I and Joint Secretary, FT and TR-II). The two CAs have been assigned as such by the Finance Minister of India.

The two CAs have regional purview over the MAP cases relying on the area of the arrangement accomplice. The CAs of India are free of the expense specialists who review citizens and take their own choices that are just officially represented by an inner administration instrument inside the CBDT, Department of Revenue.

A MAP solicitation can be made by a citizen when it thinks about that the activities of the assessment specialists of either of the settlement accomplices results or will bring about tax collection not as per the pertinent DTAA. Guide cases include cross-outskirt twofold tax assessment that could either be juridical twofold tax assessment (same salary burdened twice in the possession of a similar substance in two distinct nations) or financial twofold tax collection (same pay burdened in the possession of two separate elements, who are Associated Enterprises, in two unique nations).

Double taxation or taxation not in accordance with the DTAAs may arise in some of the following circumstances:

1. Transfer Pricing adjustments
2. Existence of a Permanent Establishment
3. Attribution of profits to a Permanent Establishment
4. Characterisation or re-characterisation of an income or expense

India's Tax Treaties or DTAAs

India has an enormous system of duty arrangements, practically all of which contain a MAP Article dependent on the arrangements of Article 25 of the UN/OECD Model Tax Convention. These duty settlements (read with segment 90 or 90A of the Income-charge Act, 1961) establish the lawful reason for citizens to apply for a MAP and for CAs to talk about and arrange a MAP case with the undertaking of finding a goal to the debate.

It is important for taxpayers to refer to the text of the relevant tax treaty itself to understand the conditions for applying for MAP under that tax treaty. India’s tax treaties are available at www.incometaxindia.gov.in

All the DTAAs went into by India, which contain a MAP Article as referenced above, necessitate that a citizen of either settlement accomplice moves toward the CA of its nation of habitation to demand for a MAP if the expense specialists of the other deal accomplice make a modification or make a move that outcomes or will bring about twofold tax collection or tax assessment not as per the important duty arrangement.

In the majority of the assessment settlements of India, as far as possible for making an application for MAP is three years from the primary warning of the activity offering ascend to such tax collection. In a set number of DTAAs, as far as possible is either less or over three years. Any place it is thus, it is relied upon to be changed to three years according to the proposal contained in the last report of BEPS Action 14. India would guarantee this through changes of such inadequate duty settlements through the Multilateral Instrument ('MLI', hereinafter) that has just happened for India w.e.f first October 2019 or through respective dealings with the pertinent arrangement accomplices.

Making a MAP Application in India

A taxpayer resident in India can make an application to the CA of India having locale over the case (contingent upon the area of deal accomplice) on the off chance that it thinks about that the activities of the duty specialists of the settlement accomplice came about or will bring about tax assessment not as per the important expense deal. Such an

application has to be made in Form No. 34F in accordance with rule 44G. The relevant provision of the rule is as follows:

‘44G (1): Where an assessee, being a resident of India, is aggrieved by any action of the tax authorities of any country or specified territory outside India for the reason that, according to him, such action is not in accordance with the terms of agreement with such other country or specified territory, he may make an application to the Competent Authority in India seeking to invoke the mutual agreement procedure, if provided in such agreement, in Form No. 34F.’

The following information and details are required to be provided in Form No. 34F while making a MAP application to the CAs of India:

• Name of the Applicant;
• Permanent Account Number (PAN)/Aadhar Number;
• Circle/Ward;
• Assessment Year(s);
• Previous Year(s);
• Office Address& Telephone Number;
• Residential Address& Telephone Number (if applicable);
• Status;
• Name and Designation of Tax Authority in the other country or specified territory (Treaty Partner);
• Date of the notice or order giving rise to the action;
• Is the order/action of the Tax Authority of the Treaty Partner not in accordance with the agreement? If so, the reasons thereof; and
• Details of remedy sought in the other country or specified territory, if any, with documentary evidence.

Form No. 34F additionally requires data about the name of the nation or determined region, the activity of the expense specialists of which have oppressed the Applicant. In thing (k) over, the Applicant ought to give the realities of the case; the investigation of issue(s) that are looked to be settled under the MAP; and the reasons why the activity taken by the expense specialists are not as per the significant DTAAs.

In addition to the above information and details, Form No. 34F requires the following documents to be furnished at the time of making the application:

• Copy of notice or order giving rise to the action not in accordance with the relevant DTAAs;
• Any document(s) as support for considering the order/action of the tax authorities of the treaty partners to be not in accordance with the relevant DTAAs;
• Any document(s) as evidence of remedy sought in the other country or specified territory; and
• Any other document that the applicant may want to submit or the CAs of India may ask for.

If an Associated Enterprise or related party of an Indian citizen presents a MAP application before the CA of its nation or determined region of living arrangement (settlement accomplice), in regard of any request/activity of the duty specialists of India or of the expense specialists of such deal accomplice, a duplicate of such MAP application should likewise be given to the CA of India having locale over the case. The CAs of such arrangement accomplices are required to quickly suggest the CAs of India about their acknowledgment of a MAP application.

The MAP application in Form No. 34F or the copy of the MAP application filed before the CAs of other countries or specified territories (treaty partners) must be submitted to the CA of India having jurisdiction over the case. There are two CAs in India. Their details are as under:

Where the treaty partner is a country or specified territory in Europe and North America (including the Caribbean) –

Joint Secretary, FT&TR-I,

Central Board of Direct Taxes, Department of Revenue,

Ministry of Finance, Government of India

Room No 803, 8th Floor,

“C” Wing, HUDCO-Vishala Building,

Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110066

Where the treaty partner is a country or specified territory in any part of the world other than Europe and North America (including the Caribbean) –

Joint Secretary, FT&TR-II,

Central Board of Direct Taxes, Department of Revenue,

Ministry of Finance, Government of India

Room No 804, 8th Floor,

“C” Wing, HUDCO-Vishala Building,

Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110066

The MAP Process

When a MAP application is acknowledged by the CA of India having purview over the case, she will insinuate the CA of the important arrangement accomplice about such acknowledgment through a composed correspondence (notice or conjuring letter). In such composed correspondence, she would likewise quickly demonstrate why she feels that the activity of the duty specialists of the deal accomplice results or will bring about tax assessment not as per the important DTAA. She would likewise demand the CA of the deal accomplice to give her composed (position paper) on the request/activity of the assessment specialists of her nation.

When a MAP application is acknowledged by the CA of India having purview over the case, she will insinuate the CA of the important arrangement accomplice about such acknowledgment through a composed correspondence (notice or conjuring letter). In such composed correspondence, she would likewise quickly demonstrate why she feels that the activity of the duty specialists of the deal accomplice results or will bring about tax assessment not as per the important DTAA. She would likewise demand the CA of the deal accomplice to give her composed (position paper) on the request/activity of the assessment specialists of her nation.

As has been shown above, when a MAP application is acknowledged, the CAs will trade sees. Much of the time, the perspectives will be imparted through position papers. When a position paper is gotten from the other CA, the CA of India having purview over the case would inspect the equivalent and go to an arranging position.

She may likewise give her own composed remarks to the next CA or request further explanation from her. After trade of positions and remarks, both the CAs would attempt to arrange a goal to the current question. They may meet face to face or haggle distantly through video chat, video gathering, or email.

In the event that both the CAs effectively resolve a MAP case, they would formalize a shared understanding among themselves at the soonest conceivable. The CA of India having ward over the case would imply the Indian citizen who had applied for MAP about the terms and states of the goal. Acknowledgment or dismissal of the MAP goal is the right of the Indian citizen yet in either circumstance, the MAP case would be shut by both the CAs as settled.

In the event that both the CAs can't resolve a MAP case, they would close the MAP case as uncertain. The CA of India having purview over the case will illuminate the Indian citizen about the non-goal of the question.

In an opposite circumstance, where the MAP application has been acknowledged by the CAs of deal accomplices, a portion of the procedures depicted above would stream in the converse bearing.

Notwithstanding the above respective MAP process, in suitable cases, the CAs of India can partake in multilateral MAP conversations with more than one deal accomplice.

Multilateral MAP cases will include all the above procedures (like trade of position papers, arrangements, conclusion of shared understandings, and so forth.) on a multilateral premise among the CAs concerned. Be that as it may, a multilateral MAP case will be executed as a progression of equal respective MAP cases. The CAs of India can consent to acknowledge a multilateral MAP demand if all the accompanying conditions are satisfied:

• All the participating countries or specified territories have DTAAs with each other;
• The transaction or issue in dispute has a bearing on all the treaty partners, directly or indirectly, and non-resolution of the dispute would result in taxation not in accordance with the relevant DTAAs; and
• The CAs of all the participating countries or specified territories agree to negotiating a multilateral MAP.

Timeframe for Resolving and Implementing MAP cases

India is resolved to try to determine MAP cases inside a normal time span of two years. It might be plainly comprehended that the dedication isn't to determine MAP cases inside that time span (it may not be workable for the two CAs to concede to a goal in all cases) however try to do as such. The responsibility is in congruity with the base principles suggested in the BEPS Action 14 last report.

The time of two years is to be figured from the "Start Date" of a MAP case. Since, directly, a large portion of the MAP cases before the CAs of India emerge from a MAP application made by a non-inhabitant citizen before the CAs of different nations or indicated domains (settlement accomplices), the "Start Date" is dictated by different CAs as per the MAP Statistics Reporting Framework.

Now and again, the CAs of India get hint of MAP cases from the CAs of the settlement accomplices much past the "Start Date". This outcomes in deferring the undertaking to determine such MAP cases.

India is completely dedicated to execute the results of every single MAP case. It is the undertaking of India to execute each MAP result speedily. The procedure and time spans to actualize such results are contained in rule 44G of the Income-charge Rules, 1962. The standard, between alia, gives the accompanying:

• How to apply for a MAP;
• Whom to apply to for a MAP;
• The role of the CAs of India in making an endeavour to resolve tax disputes under the MAP;
• Timeframes and processes after the resolution of a MAP case; and
• Role of Indian taxpayer and Indian tax authorities after the resolution of a MAP case.

The rule can be accessed in the Income-tax Rules, 1962 that is available on our website www.incometaxindia.gov.in

It can also be accessed at the following link: https://www.incometaxindia.gov.in/news/notification23 2020.pdf

PART B

Access and Denial of Access to MAP

Access to MAP

India gives wide and simple access to MAP to Indian citizens in the event that they are wronged by a request/activity of expense specialists of different nations or indicated regions (arrangement accomplices) and such requests/activities in the assessment of the citizen results or will bring about tax collection not as per the significant DTAAs. The strategy for making an application has been examined in Part An and the subtleties can be found in rule 44G of the Income-charge Rules, 1962.

India likewise gives wide and simple access to MAP when the CAs of different nations or determined domains (settlement accomplices) acknowledge a MAP application from their citizens and afterward advise the CAs of India about their acknowledgment. These MAP cases may emerge from the request/activity of expense specialists of India or of the deal accomplices that in the assessment of the abroad citizen results or will bring about tax collection not as per the significant DTAAs.

India shall provide access to MAP in respect of, inter-alia, the following types of cases/situations if they result in taxation not in accordance with the relevant DTAAs:

1. Transfer Pricing adjustments;
2. Determination of existence of a Permanent Establishment;
3. Attribution of profits to Permanent Establishments, whether admitted or not by the taxpayer;
4. Characterisation or re-characterisation of an item of expense or payment as a taxable expense or payment (like Royalty or Fee for Technical Services (FTS) or Interest); and
5. Characterisation or re-characterisation of an item of receipt as a taxable income (like Royalty or Fee for Technical Services (FTS) or Interest).

India shall provide access to MAP even in a situation where the Indian tax authorities apply domestic anti-abuse provisions.

In specific circumstances, where commitment to deduct charge at source on the installment made by an Indian element to a non-occupant element is upheld by a request gone under segment 201 of the Income-charge Act, 1961 and the equivalent is contested by the non-inhabitant element, MAP access will be given to such non-occupant substance envisioning an occasion of twofold tax collection or tax assessment not as per the pertinent DTAA.

Nonetheless, such activity being absolutely under the household law and the request under area 201 not being a request deciding any duty on salary, the MAP conversation will be taken up simply after the appraisal request is passed on account of the non-occupant citizen, and such non-inhabitant citizen thinks about that the evaluation request results or would bring about tax assessment not as per the significant DTAA.

There are a couple of conditions where India would give access to MAP yet the CAs of India would not haggle some other result than what has just been accomplished in such conditions. The conditions are the accompanying:

a) Unilateral Advance Pricing Agreements – Where an Indian or foreign taxpayer enters into a unilateral Advance Pricing Agreement (‘UAPA’, hereinafter) with the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT), the CAs of the other countries or specified territories may accept MAP applications from their taxpayers in respect of such UAPAs if any decision of the tax authorities of such other countries disturbs the income declared in the returns filed in pursuance of the UAPAs, and notify the CAs of India. The latter would allow access to MAP but would not change the terms and conditions of the UAPA. Rather, they would request the CAs of the treaty partners to provide correlative relief.

In regard of UAPA applications viable and exchange, activities of expense experts in India or abroad during such pendency of UAPA applications could offer ascent to tax assessment not as per the pertinent DTAAs. In such circumstances, the CAs of India or the CAs of different nations or indicated regions may acknowledge MAP applications from their citizens and inform one another. While the CAs of India would permit access to MAP, they would not process such MAP cases till the UAPA is gone into. In the event that the UAPA is gone into, the CAs of India would not change the terms and states of the UAPA and would demand the CAs of the arrangement accomplices to give correlative help. Notwithstanding, if the UAPA isn't gone into because of any explanation, the CAs of India would begin preparing such MAP cases, as all other MAP cases.

b) Safe Harbour – Where an Indian or foreign taxpayer applies safe harbour provisions, as applicable on its international transactions, and the return of income is accepted by the tax authorities of India, the CAs of the other countries or specified territories may accept MAP applications from their taxpayers in respect of any decision of the tax authorities of such other countries if such decision disturbs the returns filed in pursuance of such safe harbour provisions, and notify the CAs of India. The latter would allow access to MAP but would not change the ALP of the international transactions covered under the safe harbour provisions. Rather, they would request the CAs of the treaty partners to provide correlative relief.

c) Orders of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal – Since MAP and domestic remedy proceedings can be availed by the taxpayers simultaneously, there could be instances where the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (‘ITAT’, hereinafter) in India passes an order in respect of the same disputes that are also being examined under MAP. Since the ITAT is an independent statutory appellate body, which is outside the administrative jurisdiction of the Indian tax authorities; and is the highest fact-finding body on tax matters, the CAs in India shall not deviate from the orders of the ITAT for the relevant year where the dispute is decided on merits. In such cases the CA of India would request the CAs of the treaty partners to provide correlative relief, if required. Such MAP cases shall be closed as having been resolved by a domestic remedy. However, if the order of the ITAT does not resolve the disputes but only sets them aside to be adjudicated afresh, then access to MAP would be provided again after the fresh adjudication by tax authorities, if requested for by the relevant taxpayers.

Denial of Access to MAP

The CAs of India can deny access to MAP in some situations or in certain particular cases. Such situations and particular cases are as follows:

a) Delayed MAP Applications –In the event that the citizens make a MAP application to the CAs of India or to the CAs of the deal accomplices after the expiry of the timespan determined in the Article identifying with MAP(corresponding to Article 25(1) second sentence of the OECD Model Tax Convention) of the important DTAAs, the CAs of India would not give access to MAP. This timeframe in many settlements is inside three years from the principal notice of the request/activity of duty specialists that outcomes or will bring about tax collection not as per the pertinent DTAAs. India is focused on giving this 3-year timeframe and practically all the DTAAs went into by India has this timespan. There are not very many DTAAs where this base timespan is missing, and endeavors are on to correct those DTAAs to accommodate the equivalent.

b) Taxpayer’s Objection Not Justified –On the off chance that the CAs of India arrive at a resolution that the protest raised by the citizen on the activity taken by charge specialists isn't advocated, they can deny access to MAP. In any case, before taking a choice to deny access to MAP in such circumstances, the CA of India having ward over the case would examine the issue with the citizen and the CA of the settlement accomplice. Be that as it may, such discussion will not be deciphered as meeting regarding how to determine the case.

c) Incomplete MAP Applications/Documents/Information –At the point when an Indian citizen makes a MAP application in India in Form No. 34F, it is relied upon to be finished in all regards. On the off chance that the CAs of India bring up certain blunders or imperfections in the application or request extra data/records, the Indian citizen should cure the mistakes/surrenders and ought to give the data/reports inside a sensible timespan. There is no endorsed timespan in rule 44G for the Indian citizen to conform to such extra prerequisites. Subsequently, the CAs of India are relied upon to give sufficient opportunity to the citizen to cure the blunders/absconds and give the data/records. Ordinarily, a timeframe of 30 days for helping the blunders/deformities and 90 days for giving the extra data/archives ought to be given by the CAs of India to encourage the procedure, which can be stretched out by the CAs relying upon the realities and conditions of the case.

In regard of MAP applications acknowledged by the CAs of arrangement accomplices and in this manner told to the CAs of India and acknowledged by the last mentioned, decide 44G gives that the CAs of India can call for data/archives from the Indian citizens or their agents.

The standard doesn't recommend whenever limit upon the citizens or their delegates to outfit such data/records. Thus, the CAs of India are relied upon to give sufficient chance to the citizens or their delegates to give the data/reports. Ordinarily a timeframe of 90 days for giving the extra data/records ought to be given by the CAs of India to encourage the procedure, which can be stretched out by the CAs relying upon the realities and conditions of the case.

d) Income-tax Settlement Commission – Sections 245A to 245L in Chapter XIX-A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 provide for the constitution of a commission called the Income-tax Settlement Commission (‘ITSC’, hereinafter) for the settlement of cases. The ITSC is an independent statutory dispute resolution body. The process of settlement of disputes by ITSC is independent from the audit and examination functions of tax It is a voluntary process and a taxpayer has to apply for a settlement of its disputes. Once the application is accepted, the ITSC examines all aspects of the dispute and comes out with a settlement order. If the ITSC issues a settlement order, the same is binding on both the taxpayer and the tax authorities.

The CAs of India will not give access to MAP to an Indian citizen who has just gotten a settlement request from the ITSC and such request covers the issues that are tried to be remembered for the MAP application. So also, the CAs of India will not concede a case under MAP where the CAs of the arrangement accomplices have acknowledged a MAP application by a citizen of their nation or determined domain who (or its related endeavor in India) has just acquired a settlement request from the ITSC and such request covers the issues that have been remembered for the MAP application acknowledged by the CAs of the deal accomplices.

The CAs of India will likewise not give access to MAP to an Indian citizen or concede a case under MAP where the CAs of the deal accomplices have acknowledged a MAP application by a citizen of their nation or indicated an area, if both of such citizen's settlement application has been conceded by the ITSC and the settlement matter is under assessment by the ITSC.

In any case, if the ITSC won't issue a settlement request, or issues a request without making a settlement, or the procedures before the ITSC decrease, and afterward the assessment specialists make a move which in the assessment of the citizen results or will bring about tax collection not as per the important DTAAs, the CAs of India will give access to MAP to an Indian citizen or concede a case under MAP where the CAs of the arrangement accomplices have acknowledged a MAP application by a citizen of their nation or determined domain.

e) Authority for Advance Rulings – Sections 245N to 245V in Chapter XIX-B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 provide for the constitution of an authority called the Authority for Advance Rulings (‘AAR’, hereinafter) for giving advance rulings on questions/issues brought before it by a taxpayer. The AAR is an independent statutory dispute prevention body. The process of giving advance rulings by AAR is independent from the audit and examination functions of tax authorities. It is a voluntary process and a taxpayer has to apply for obtaining a ruling. Once the application is admitted, the AAR examines all aspects of the question(s)/issue(s) brought before it and pronounces its advance ruling on such question(s)/issue(s). If the AAR pronounces an advance ruling, the same is binding on both the taxpayer and the tax authorities.

The CAs of India will not give access to MAP to an Indian citizen who has just gotten a development administering from the AAR and such development deciding spreads the issues that are tried to be remembered for the MAP application. Additionally, the CAs of India will won't concede a case under MAP where the CAs of the settlement accomplices have acknowledged a MAP application by a citizen of their nation or determined domain who (or its related endeavor in India or the pertinent party to the exchange on which the development administering is looked for) has just acquired a development administering from the AAR and such development deciding spreads the issues that have been remembered for the MAP application acknowledged by the CAs of the arrangement

The CAs of India will likewise not give access to MAP to an Indian citizen or concede a case under MAP where the CAs of the settlement accomplices have acknowledged a MAP application by a citizen of their nation or determined domain, if both of such citizen's application (or that ofthe significant gathering to the exchange on which the development administering is looked for) has been conceded by the AAR and the question(s)/issue(s) indicated in the application is under assessment by the AAR.

In addition to the situations and particular cases at (a) to (e) above, it is clarified that no MAP access shall be provided in respect of issues that are purely governed by India’s domestic law and arise due to the implementation of India’s domestic legal provisions.

PART C

Technical Issues

I. Downward Adjustment

The CAs of India can arrange a MAP case with their partners and pull back all or part of the changes made by charge experts in India. Notwithstanding, the CAs of India can't go underneath the returned salary, as the equivalent is explicitly precluded in Indian residential law.

In regard of move valuing cases, a plain perusing of the arrangements of sub-area (3) of segment 92 of the Income-charge Act, 1961 clarifies that if the utilization of the a manageable distance cost of a universal exchange brings about diminishing the salary chargeable to burden or expanding the misfortune, as figured based on books of record kept up, at that point the arrangements of the said segment 92 will not matter. The CAs of India need to hold fast to this arrangement while arranging move valuing MAP cases including changes made by Indian expense specialists.

However, in respect of MAP cases involving adjustments made by tax authorities of a treaty partner, the Indian CA may go below the returned income of the Indian taxpayer to implement the MAP in full measure in accordance with treaty obligations.

Resolution of Recurring Issues

The CAs of India may resolve repeating issues on similar standards, as received in an earlier MAP goal. Be that as it may, they can't resolve such repeating issues ahead of time of a request/activity by the duty experts in India. At the end of the day, they don't have the ability to keep the assessment specialists from making a request that isn't in similarity with earlier MAP goals in the event of a similar citizen and on similar issues.

Interest and Penalties

In a large portion of the questions on the quantum of pay, that are settled under MAP, there are significant issues of intrigue and punishment. The CAs of India don't have the command to think about such significant issues and arrange debates emerging from such issues.

These are to be regulated under the local laws. Be that as it may, where the measure of intrigue and punishments are connected to the quantum of salary, such intrigue and punishments will be differed in a similar extent as the variety in the quantum of pay because of a MAP goal, as per the residential law. It might be noticed that there are arrangements of charges/punishment under Indian Income-charge Act which are not associated with the quantum of pay and, in like manner, those would not be influenced by the goal under MAP.

Secondary Adjustments

India has an arrangement to make auxiliary modifications in regard of situations where the essential exchange evaluating change has been made in money related year 2016-17 or from that point. Subsequently, the CAs of India would be committed to make such auxiliary changes some portion of the MAP goal in regard of cases relating to money related year 2016-17 or from there on.

Bilateral & Multilateral APAs

India has an entrenched APA Program that incorporates one-sided, two-sided and multilateral APAs. In regard of issues for which a two-sided or multilateral APA application has just been recorded and acknowledged, MAP applications on similar issues for the equivalent years ought not be made by the citizens. On the off chance that such MAP applications are made either before the CAs of India or the CAs of deal accomplices, the CAs of India will talk with their partners and not concede such MAP applications.

However, if a bilateral or multilateral APA application fails to result in an Agreement for any reason, then a MAP application on the same issue and for the same years can be made either before the CAs of India or the CAs of treaty partners and the same may be accepted by the CAs of India if it satisfies all conditions of a MAP application.

Suspension of Collection of Taxes during the Pendency of MAP

With a predetermined number of arrangement accomplices, India has gone into a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU), under the ambit of the MAP Article, that accommodates keeping the assortment of assessments for a situation under suspension during the pendency of MAP all things considered.

The taxes whose collection can be suspended are those that have arisen from the dispute that is under discussion in MAP. Taxpayers have to adhere to the terms and conditions mentioned in the MoU to be able to get the collection of taxes suspended.

In respect of MAP cases with countries where no such MoU exists in the DTAAs, the domestic law of India (including Instructions/Circulars issued by CBDT) shall govern the procedures related to suspension of collection of taxes or stay of demand.

Adjustment of taxes paid in pursuance of demand raised by an order under Section 201 of the Income-tax Act

Payment of taxes (excluding interest) made as a result of demand arising out of an order passed under section 201 of the Income-tax Act on the Indian taxpayer (payer entity) may be allowed to be adjusted against the tax liability of the non-resident taxpayer(payee entity) in the event of resolution of MAP in the case of such non-resident taxpayer for the relevant issues and relevant years.

PART D

Implementation of MAP Outcomes

Implementation of MAP

India is focused on actualizing MAP results in every single case. There are no lawful or managerial obstacles to actualizing MAP results. The main special case to this overall principle is MAP cases in which a request for the ITAT (for a similar appraisal year that has been settled under MAP) goes to the information on the CAs of India after the MAP has been settled or is articulated after the MAP has been settled yet not yet actualized.

In regard of the above cases/circumstances, the MAP results can't be actualized and the CAs of India would advise their partners about the results regarding the ITAT request and solicitation them to give correlative help to the changes continued by the ITAT, assuming any.

Timelines

The new principle 44G, which has been examined before, gives clear timetables to the citizen and the assessment experts in India to actualize a MAP that has been settled by the CAs of both deal accomplices. The citizen has been given a timespan of 30 days (from the date of receipt of a correspondence from the CAs of India) to pass on its acknowledgment of the MAP goal and to submit proof of withdrawal of local interests.

Passing on of acknowledgment of the MAP goal inside this timespan is compulsory and inability to do so may deliver the MAP goal unimplementable. Likewise, the Assessing Officer has been given a timespan of one month (from the month's end where he gets the letter of the CA of India having ward over the case giving subtleties of the goal) for offering impact to the MAP goal. These courses of events are relied upon to animate the MAP usage procedure and make it more proficient and compelling.

While intimating the Pr. CCIT concerned the details of resolution agreed under the MAP, the CAs of India shall mark a copy of their letter to the Assessing Officer, her controlling officer, the CIT/PCIT and CCIT concerned, and to the taxpayer to ensure expeditious implementation.

Information to CAs of India

The Assessing Officer, notwithstanding sending a duplicate of the request offering impact to the MAP goal to the CA of India having locale over the case, should likewise give data in regards to the sum/date of installment of duties by the citizen or sum/date of issue of discount to the citizen (all things considered), withdrawal of claims recorded by the expense specialists, and some other applicable subtleties.

The MAP guidance, as above, may be adhered and referred to by taxpayers, tax practitioners, tax authorities in India, and CAs of India. If any element of the MAP guidance comes in conflict with the domestic legislation, rules, instructions, and circulars in India or with the DTAAs entered into by India, the provisions of such domestic legislation, rules, instructions, and circulars or the DTAAs, as the case may be, shall prevail.