• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
Offices FAQs Careers
contact+91-161-2301394 email us Email US
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
company name

Ashwani & associates

India's Top Tax GST Consultancy, Advisory Firm

  • Home
  • About
    • Our Story
    • Our Team
    • Why Us
    • Associations
    • Our Approach
  • Industries
    • Manufacturing
    • Professional Services
    • Startups
    • Financial Services
    • Media & Technology
    • Non Profit Organizations
    • Healthcare & Lifesciences
    • Real Estate & Construction
    • Educational Services
    • Retail & Trade
  • Services
    • Audit & Assurance
      • Statutory Audit
      • Tax Audit
      • Forensic Audit
      • Internal Audit
      • Management Audits
      • Certifications
    • Tax & Regulatory
      • Advisory
      • Compliance
      • Transfer Pricing
      • International Tax
      • FEMA Consultancy
      • DTAA
      • Services to NRI
      • Customs
      • RBI Filings/Compliance
    • Goods & Services Tax
      • GST Registration
      • GST Audit
      • Refund under GST
      • Advisiory under GST
      • GST Outsourcing
      • GST Impact Analysis & Treatment
    • Consulting & Restructing
      • Corporate Finance
      • Merger & Acquisition
      • Due Diligence
      • Valuations
    • Dispute Resolution
    • Business Setup in India
      • Liaison Office in India
      • Branch office in India
      • Project Office in India
      • Entry Strategy
      • Closing Strategy
  • Resources
    • Insights
    • Publications
  • Contact
  • Request call back
Understanding Of Amendments Made

Understanding Of Amendments Made To Section 9A Of Income Tax Act, 1961 – By Bhavesh Jindal

BACKGROUND

Section 9A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was introduced through Finance Act, 2015 to provide relief and to resolve certain ambiguity in taxation of fund managers and investment funds, particularly off shore funds which were managed by Fund managers located in India.

Section 9 of the Act, contains a deeming provision wherein under certain circumstances an income shall be deemed to accrue or arise in India and Section 9(1)(i) of the Act inter-alia includes an income accruing or arising in India (directly or indirectly) through or from a business connection in India. Once such a connection is established, the income attributable to business connection becomes taxable in India. Furthermore, as per section 6, which governs residency provisions of the Indian Income Tax, there can be instances when an investment fund can be said to be resident of India, due to location of fund manager in India and thus, the entire income of the fund including the income earned by the investment fund outside India could be taxed to Income Tax in India as income attributable to business connection in India.

However, by introduction of Section 9A, which contains a non-obstante clause and overrides section 6 & 9 of the Act respectively, an Eligible Investment Funds (EIF) which is established or incorporated outside India and which fulfils certain prescribed conditions as specified under section 9A (3) and whose activities are carried through Eligible Fund Manager (EFM) as specified under sub-section 4, shall not constitute business connection in India. It further provides that the fund shall not be said to be resident in India merely because the eligible fund manager is situated in India.

ISSUE

After the changes brought in through FA 2015, by providing a safe harbor regime for off shore funds, there were some issues which needed due consideration. One of the conditions which was required to be fulfilled in order to be an EIF as provided under Section 9A(3)(m), was that “the remuneration paid by the fund to an EFM in respect of fund management activity undertaken by him on its behalf is not less than the arm’s length price of the said activity.”

Further, rules 10V, 10VA and 10VB contained guidelines for application of Section 9A, manner of approval of the fund and statements to be furnished by the fund in form 3CEK respectively. As per sub-rule 5 of Rule 10V, the transactions between EIF and EFM were deemed as an international transaction and transfer pricing provisions were made applicable. Thus, form 3CEJ under Section 92E was required to be filed by the fund manager.

Also, as per sub-rule 10 of rule 10V, the relief provided under section 9A could be revoked if the remuneration paid or payable to the fund manager was not determined as per arm’s length price in three previous years in succession; or for any three out of four preceding previous years, which made it difficult for funds to avail the benefit of this safe harbour regime.

RECENT CHANGES

In order to resolve this issue, an amendment1 was brought in Section 9A(3)(m), wherein under the revised clause, it was provided that –

“the remuneration paid by the fund to an eligible fund manager in respect of fund management activity undertaken by him on its behalf is not less than the amount calculated in such manner as may be prescribed2”.

CBDT earlier3 released a draft seeking comments on the rules to be prescribed under Section 9A(3)(m) in order to prescribe minimum remuneration to be paid by an EIF to the EFM for activities taken in for the fund. After receiving comments from stakeholders, recently CBDT issued notification4, wherein the rules for payment of minimum remuneration to be paid were notified, and new sub rules 10 to 13 under rule 10V were inserted.

RECENT AMENDMENTS

As per recently inserted sub-rule 12, minimum remuneration to be paid by an EIF to EFM shall be as under: 

CATEGORIES REMUNERATION
Where the EIF falls within specific categories of Category-I Foreign Portfolio Investor (FPI) 0.1% of the Assets under Management 
Where the remuneration is based on the assets under management 0.3% of the Assets under Management
Where the remuneration is linked to the income or profits of the EIF   10% of profits in excess of the specified hurdle rate 
Other arrangements   50% of the management fee (whether in the nature of fixed charge or linked to the income or profits derived by the fund from the management activity undertaken by the fund manager) paid by such fund in respect of the fund management activity undertaken by the fund manager as reduced by the amount incurred towards operational expenses including distribution expenses (if any). This threshold shall apply only in case the fund is also making payment of management fee to an overseas fund manager engaged by the fund.

Meaning of Certain terms for the purpose of the above rule:

  • “asset under management” means the annual average of the monthly average of the opening and closing balance of the value of such part of the fund which is managed by the fund manager;
  • “management fee” means the amount mentioned in the certificate obtained from an accountant, as defined in clause (i) of Explanation to rule 11UB, for this purpose;
  • “specified hurdle rate” mean a pre-defined threshold beyond which the fund agrees to pay a share of the profits earned by the fund from the fund management activity undertaken by the fund manager.
  • Category -I of FPI5
  • Government and Government related investors such as central banks, sovereign wealth funds, international or multilateral organizations or agencies including entities controlled or at least 75% directly or indirectly owned by such Government and Government related investor(s); 
  • Pension funds and university funds; 
  • Appropriately regulated entities such as insurance or reinsurance entities, banks, asset management companies, investment managers, investment advisors, portfolio managers, broker-dealers and swap dealers; 
  • Entities from Financial Action Task Force Member countries which are university-related endowments of such universities that have been in existence for more than 5 years.

Further, as per the amendment, sub-rules 5 to 10 of rule 10V have been deleted, therefore deeming provision of EIF and EFM to be associated enterprises have been removed. Meaning thereby, the transfer pricing provisions and the provisions relating to revocation of safe harbour benefit if remuneration is not at arm’s length price in 3 consecutive years or 3 out of 4 previous years are no longer applicable6. However, in case where the EFM are EIF are associated as per Section 92A, the TP provisions shall still continue to apply.

The new rules further allow the fund to apply to CBDT and seek approval of the board for a lower amount to be paid as remuneration, and the board on being satisfied may approve such lower amount of remuneration.

The details of activity undertaken for the fund shall be furnished by way of a report from accountant in Form 3CEJA which shall be furnished along with any other report required to be furnished under Section 92E (if any).

CONCLUSION

This move of the government to remove the deeming provisions and cover the transaction under purview of transfer pricing provisions is well appreciated and the same shall encourage management of investment funds from India, which will further help give a boost to the economy. This move is also at par with ease of doing business initiative of the Central Government.

Further, an option provided by the CBDT to apply for a lower remuneration, leaves an open window, wherein those assets which are not specifically covered in the newly notified rules can be covered. These amendments also seek to answer stakeholders concerns of being debarred from the benefit of section 9A, if transfer pricing provisions were not satisfied in previous years.


    1. Section 9A(3)(m) was amended by Finance Act, 2019 (No. 2), w.e.f. 01st April 2019.
    2. Inserted by Income-tax (Tenth Amendment) Rules, 2020 w.e.f. 01st April 2019.
    3. The draft was released on 05th December 2019 seeking comments till 19th December 2019.
    4. Notification No. 29 dated 27th May 2020.
    5. As provided in regulation 5 of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Foreign Portfolio Investors) Regulations, 2019
    6. Provisions of sub-rule 5 to 10 shall not apply w.e.f. 01st April 2019.

Written by:
Aditya Kumar
Published on:
June 3, 2020

Categories: Income Tax, TaxationTags: EIF, Fund Manager, Income Tax Act, Off Shore Funds

Explore more

Ashwani & associates is an audit,tax & consulting firm with an experience of more than 70 years through our professional expertise and dedicated team of experts. Our entire team has a can-do attitude and is client-oriented. We have worked with clients ranging from emerging entities to large billion dollar multinational corporations.

Overview

Our Story

Services

Industries

Insights

Careers

Offices

FAQs

Offices

Ludhiana

New Delhi

Mumbai

Chandigarh

Subscribe newsletter

Get latest updates in your inbox


    Footer

    Copyright © 2025 · Ashwani & Associates chartered accountants

    • Facebook
    • LinkedIn
    • Twitter
    Abhinav

    Aditya is an alumnus of the prestigious Doon School– Dehradun and Member of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI). He has also completed his law degree from one of the premier law institutes of India. He further went on to an MBA program from Columbia Business School. Prior toAshwani and Associates, he has worked with M/s.PricewaterhouseCoopers India Private Ltd. for six years, where he acquired comprehensive experience on the application of indirect tax laws in practice and audit. He thushas experience and a vast working knowledge of all aspects of service tax and trade law, VAT and the like. As one of the partners, Aditya manages large projects for multinational and Indian clients. These projects often involve the execution of work in the areas of Customs, Foreign Trade Policy, CENVAT,
    supply chain management and indirect tax due diligence through the several offices of Ashwani & Associates in India. He has also authored the first book on Goods and Service Tax in India, published by Taxmann.

    Request Call Back