Income earned by non-resident investor from off-shore investments routed through an Alternate Investment Fund not taxable being deemed direct investment
Government of India
Ministry of Finance
Department of Revenue
Central Board of Direct Taxes
North-Block, New Delhi, dated the 3rd of July, 2019
In the context of Alternate Investment Funds (AIFs), references have been made to the Central Board of Direct Taxes (the Board) seeking clarity regarding taxability of income from investments made by the non-resident investor through these AIFs, outside India (off-shore investment).
2. The incidence of tax arising from off-shore investment made by a non-resident investor through the AIFs would depend on determination of status of income of non-resident investor as per provisions of section 5(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (Act). As per section 5(2) of the Act, the income of a person who is non-resident, is liable to be taxed abcaus.in in India if it is received or is deemed to be received in India in such year by or on behalf of such person; or accrues or arises or is deemed to accrue or arise to him in India.
3. Chapter XII-FB contains special provisions relating to tax on income of investment funds and income received from such Under Chapter XII-FB, section 115UB of the Act (‘Tax on income of investment fund and its unit holders) is the applicable provision to determine the income and tax-liability of investment funds & their investors.In this context, ”investment fund”“is defined in Explanation 1 of Chapter XII-FB to mean any fund established or incorporated in India in the form of a trust or a company or a limited liability partnership or a body corporate which has been granted a certificate of registration as a Category-I or Category-II Alternative Investment Fund and is regulated under the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Alternative Investment Fund) Regulations, 2012, made under the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (15 of 1992). Thus, provisions of section 115UB apply only to Category Ior Category IIAIFs, as defined in SEBI’s regulations.
4. By an overriding effect over other provisions of the Act, sub-section (1) of section 115UB of the Act provides that any income accruing or arising to, or received by, a person, being a unit holder of an investment fund, out of investments made in the investment fund, shall be chargeable to income-tax in the same manner as if it were the income accruing or arising to, or received by, such person had the investments made by the investment fund been made directly by him and not through the AIF.
5. The matter has been considered by the Board. As section 115UB(1) of the Act provides that the investments made by Category I or Category II AIFs are deemed to have been made by the investor directly, it is hereby clarified that any income in the hands of the non-resident investor from off-shore investments routed through the Category I or Category II AIF, being a deemed direct investment outside India by the non-resident investor. is not taxable in India under section 5(2) of the Act.
6. It is further clarified that loss arising from the off-shore investment relating to non-resident investor, being an exempt loss, shall not be allowed to be set-off or carried-forward and set off against the income of the Category I or Category II AIF.
7. The contents of this Circular may be circulated widely for information of all stakeholders and departmental officers.
8. Hindi version to follow.
Sd/-
(Rajarajeswari R.}
Under Secretary (ITA.II}, CBDT
(F. No. 225/79/2019-ITA.II)
Copy to:-
Penalty u/s 271B is not attracted in a case where books of account have not been maintained In a recent…
NALCO invites RFP for empanelment of Chartered Accountant Firms for verification of Stores/Spares and movable assets. NALCO has invited Request…
Sending or bringing currency of Nepal and Bhutan - RBI revises exiting regulations RBI has notified the Foreign Exchange Management…
Entire manufacturing process though by distinct units relevant for exemption from excise duty on account of manufacture without aid of…
High Court condoned delay in filing Form 10B as the failure was in the 1st Year of operation of the…
Penalty u/s 270A quashed as there was no satisfaction in the penalty order on what exactly was under reporting of…