Tax & Transfer Pricing Compliance
Corporate taxation, GST frameworks, transfer pricing regulations, and permanent establishment risk management for GCC operations under Income Tax Act 1961 and OECD guidelines.
On This Page
Overview
Tax structuring constitutes one of the most complex and high-stakes dimensions of GCC operations in India. The interplay between domestic corporate tax, goods and services tax, transfer pricing regulations aligned with OECD standards, and bilateral tax treaties creates a multifaceted compliance landscape. GCCs must navigate permanent establishment risk for their overseas parent entities, manage cost-plus versus transactional net margin method benchmarking for intercompany arrangements, optimize input tax credit under GST for export services, and address specified domestic transaction rules for charges between Indian group entities. The Indian tax authority's increasingly sophisticated approach to base erosion and profit shifting, combined with real-time data analytics capabilities, demands proactive and defensible tax positions supported by robust contemporaneous documentation.
Key Considerations
Corporate tax rate optimization: section 115BAA concessional rate (22% plus surcharge and cess) vs incentive-linked regimes
Transfer pricing method selection: cost-plus (typically 10-15% markup) vs transactional net margin method for service arrangements
Advance Pricing Agreement (APA) strategies: unilateral vs bilateral APAs, rollback provisions, and renewal timelines
Permanent establishment risk: dependent agent PE, service PE under tax treaties, profit attribution methodologies
GST classification: export of services criteria, zero-rating eligibility, place of supply rules for intermediary services
Specified domestic transactions: benchmarking requirements for India-India intercompany charges exceeding Rs 20 crore threshold
Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) applicability and MAT credit utilization strategies for SEZ units post-exemption period
Equalization levy: applicability to digital services, 2% levy on e-commerce operators, and nexus thresholds
Regulatory Framework
Income Tax Act 1961 - Sections 92-92F (Transfer Pricing)
Transfer pricing provisions apply to international transactions and specified domestic transactions. Arm's length principle (section 92) requires transactions between associated enterprises to be priced at market rates. Methods: CUP, resale price, cost-plus, TNMM, profit split. Form 3CEB (transfer pricing audit report) mandatory if international transactions exceed Rs 1 crore. Safe harbor rules under section 92CB provide certainty for routine services (cost-plus 15-20% deemed acceptable). Penalty provisions: 100-300% of tax sought to be evaded for non-maintenance of documentation. Secondary adjustment provisions (section 92CE) and primary adjustment reconciliation complicate repatriation planning.
Goods and Services Tax Act 2017
GCCs rendering services to overseas group entities qualify as export of services if: (1) supplier and recipient are in different countries; (2) services are consumed outside India; (3) payment received in convertible foreign exchange; and (4) supplier and recipient are not establishments of same entity. Zero-rated supplies (section 16) permit input tax credit refund. Reverse charge mechanism for specified services (section 5(3)). Registration mandatory if aggregate turnover exceeds Rs 20 lakh (Rs 40 lakh for goods). Place of supply rules (sections 12-13) critical for service classification—default is location of recipient for B2B services. Time of supply determines tax point.
Advance Pricing Agreement Scheme (Rules 10F-10T)
APAs provide tax certainty for transfer pricing methodology over 4-5 years (unilateral) or longer (bilateral with treaty partners). Process: file Form 3CED, pay fees (Rs 10-27 lakh depending on transaction value), negotiate with CBDT APA team. Bilateral APAs involve MAP under tax treaties, requiring coordination with treaty partner competent authorities. Rollback provisions allow application to previous 4 years if under audit. APA renewal can extend coverage. Strategic value: eliminates transfer pricing litigation risk, facilitates predictable cash flow planning, evidences good faith compliance. Average processing time: 24-36 months for unilateral, 36-48 months for bilateral.
Tax Treaties & Permanent Establishment Risk
OECD Model Tax Convention Article 5 defines PE as fixed place of business through which enterprise carries business. India's treaties vary: some include service PE clauses (presence exceeding 183/270 days creates PE). Dependent agent PE risk if Indian GCC habitually concludes contracts on behalf of foreign parent or plays principal role in contract conclusion (post-MLI modifications). Software development for parent may not create PE if preparatory/auxiliary. Profit attribution follows OECD AOA—functional analysis determines PE profit split. Safe harbor: captive service provider serving only parent typically avoids PE attribution but requires arm's length remuneration.
TCL Framework Application
Technical Dimension
Technology architecture influences GST and transfer pricing analysis. Cloud infrastructure costs—whether procured directly by GCC or recharged by parent—affect input tax credit eligibility and transfer pricing margin benchmarking. Software licenses for development tools, if provided by parent, require royalty withholding tax analysis (section 195) and examination of "Make Available" clauses in tax treaties. Open-source vs proprietary tech stacks impact IP ownership documentation. Data storage location (India vs overseas) triggers DPDPA considerations but also GST place of supply analysis for data hosting services.
Commercial Dimension
Cost-plus pricing methodology requires defensible markup percentages. Industry benchmarking data (RoyaltyRange, Capitaline) critical for comparable company analysis. Operating expense allocation policies between parent and GCC—HR, finance, legal shared services—must withstand scrutiny under specified domestic transaction rules if multiple Indian entities exist. Management fees recharges from parent require benefit test under section 37(1)—demonstrable value addition necessary to sustain deduction. Foreign exchange fluctuation risk on intercompany receivables/payables impacts earnings—hedge accounting under Ind AS complicates tax deductibility.
Legal Dimension
Master service agreement drafting must align with transfer pricing documentation. Specify: (1) functions performed, assets employed, risks assumed (FAR analysis); (2) payment terms—quarterly vs annual, currency denomination; (3) markup percentage or TNMM PLI with reference to tested party; (4) adjustment mechanisms for scope changes; (5) audit rights for parent; (6) most favored nation clause preventing margin compression if better rates offered to third parties. Intercompany loan agreements require section 94B compliance on interest deductibility limits (30% of EBITDA for interest exceeding Rs 1 crore). IP licensing agreements need clarity on royalty rates, exclusivity, territory, and sublicensing rights to support withholding tax positions.
Practical Guidance
Engage transfer pricing economist for contemporaneous documentation (due by income tax return filing date). Include industry analysis, FAR analysis, benchmarking study with 6+ comparables at arm's length range.
For high-value or complex arrangements, pursue APA—file within 6-9 months of financial year end to allow negotiation time before tax return deadline.
Maintain intercompany correspondence evidencing business rationale for transactions: emails discussing service scope, quarterly business review decks, SLAs with performance metrics.
Implement GST compliance protocols: monthly reconciliation of GSTR-2A vs books, timely filing of GSTR-1/3B, tracking of export invoices and foreign exchange realization in FIRC (Foreign Inward Remittance Certificate) for audit purposes.
For permanent establishment risk mitigation: (1) ensure GCC does not negotiate or conclude contracts on parent's behalf; (2) decision-making authority for business development must reside overseas; (3) Indian management titles should reflect support roles—avoid "Country Head" nomenclature.
Structure specified domestic transactions with same rigor as international: if Indian GCC charges another Indian group entity (e.g., local subsidiary), benchmark at arm's length to avoid penalty exposure.
Plan for secondary adjustments: section 92CE requires primary adjustments exceeding Rs 1 crore to be repatriated within prescribed time, else deemed dividend with tax implications.
Monitor MAT liability: section 115JB levies minimum alternate tax on book profits. For SEZ units post-tax holiday, MAT credit accumulated can offset future tax, plan utilization over 15-year window.
Common Pitfalls
Relying on parent company transfer pricing documentation without India-specific benchmarking: Indian tax authority requires India-comparables for GCC services, US or global studies inadequate.
Markup percentage drift: failing to update cost-plus markup in master service agreement when GCC assumes greater functions or risks leads to transfer pricing adjustments.
GST input tax credit leakage: blocked credits for employee costs (rent-a-cab, health insurance non-GST services) often overlooked in margin calculations, eroding effective GST benefit of export classification.
Treating all parent recharges as non-taxable: management fees, royalties, and interest payments require withholding tax compliance under sections 194J, 195—failure attracts 30-40% disallowance under section 40.
Inadequate substance documentation for PE defense: asserting GCC is preparatory/auxiliary without demonstrating limited decision-making authority, lack of contract conclusion power, and routine nature of functions is insufficient.
Commingling domestic and export services without bifurcated accounting: GST authorities require clear segregation—common input allocation methodologies must be documented and consistently applied.
Missing specified domestic transaction threshold: Rs 20 crore applies to aggregate India-India intercompany transactions, not per-transaction; once threshold crossed, all domestic related-party transactions require benchmarking.
Ignoring shadow tax filings: even if SEZ unit enjoys 100% income tax exemption, income tax return must be filed to maintain compliance status and support future utilization of deductions.
Frequently Asked Questions
What transfer pricing methodology is most suitable for a captive software development GCC?
Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM) using operating margin (OP/TC or OP/Sales) as profit level indicator is standard. Benchmark GCC (tested party) against comparable independent service providers using databases like Capitaline or Prowess. Target arm's length range typically 15-25% OP/TC for software development, varying based on: (1) complexity—routine coding vs product innovation; (2) asset intensity—capital employed for infrastructure; (3) risk profile—whether GCC bears demand/market risk or operates on cost-plus assured margin. Alternative: Cost Plus Method if GCC is functionally integrated with parent and lacks independent comparable transactions—typically 10-15% markup on total costs. APA discussions often converge on percentile within arm's length range (e.g., 40th-60th percentile) to provide certainty. Document method selection rationale in Form 3CEB.
How can a GCC mitigate permanent establishment risk for the overseas parent entity?
PE risk mitigation requires operational substance alignment with legal documentation: (1) Master service agreement must explicitly state GCC is service provider, not branch or dependent agent of parent; (2) Contract conclusion authority must reside overseas—no Indian employee should have power to bind parent to customer contracts; (3) Business development for parent's products/services should occur offshore—Indian team supports post-sale delivery only; (4) Management titles matter—avoid "Managing Director" or "Country Head" nomenclature suggesting independent business; use "Head of Delivery" or "Operations Lead"; (5) For service PE risk under treaties, monitor cumulative days of services rendered in India by parent entity employees—structure work to remain below treaty threshold (typically 183/270 days); (6) Functional characterization: emphasize support nature of GCC work (back-office, IT development, analytics) vs revenue-generating activities. Annual PE risk assessment advised given treaty developments and MLI impact.
Are services rendered by Indian GCC to parent company subject to GST?
No, if structured as export of services. GCC services to overseas parent qualify for zero-rating under section 16 of IGST Act if: (1) supplier (GCC) located in India, recipient (parent) located outside India; (2) place of supply outside India per section 13—for B2B services, default location is recipient's location; (3) payment received in convertible foreign exchange (USD, EUR, etc.); and (4) supplier and recipient are not merely establishments of same entity. Fourth condition creates complexity—if GCC invoices parent directly (separate legal entities), export classification applies; if treated as internal cost allocation without invoice, GST implications differ. Best practice: GCC raises commercial invoices on parent at arm's length pricing, realizes payment in forex, maintains FIRC (foreign inward remittance certificate) for audit purposes. Benefit: input GST on procurements (IT equipment, office infrastructure) eligible for refund under export scheme, improving cash flows. Excluded from export: services consumed in India, or recipient is merely Indian entity's overseas branch.
What is the process and timeline for obtaining an Advance Pricing Agreement?
APA process spans 24-48 months with steps: (1) Pre-filing consultation: optional informal meeting with CBDT APA team to discuss covered transactions and proposed methodology (3-6 months); (2) Formal application: file Form 3CED with fees (Rs 10 lakh for transactions < Rs 100 crore; Rs 15 lakh for Rs 100-200 crore; Rs 27 lakh beyond Rs 200 crore). Fees non-refundable even if application withdrawn; (3) Review phase: tax authority evaluates FAR analysis, benchmarking, requests clarifications (12-18 months). Unilateral APAs decided by Indian authority alone; bilateral APAs require coordination with treaty partner competent authority under MAP; (4) Negotiation: discussions on methodology, tested party, comparable set, arm's length range. Compromise inevitable—authority may accept TNMM but propose different comparables; (5) Draft APA: typically 4-5 year coverage, specifies critical assumptions, annual compliance report obligations, provisions for revision if assumptions breached; (6) Execution: signed APA binding on tax authority and taxpayer. Renewal: can apply 6 months before expiry. Rollback: if international transaction under audit, APA can cover 4 prior years from APA year, resolving litigation. Strategic filing time: submit 6-9 months before tax return deadline to allow execution before transfer pricing audit cycle.
Related GCC Topics
Need Expert Guidance on Tax & Transfer Pricing Compliance?
Our specialized GCC practice combines technical depth with practical commercial insight to deliver actionable legal solutions.
Get in Touch