We filed Form 3CEAC late, what is the consequence?
The charge on a filing of this kind is worked out by reference to the form and the length of the delay rather than to tax, so the delay is the thing to stop. File, then establish the two facts the filing turns on: which company is the group's parent entity for reporting purposes, and the jurisdiction in which the group report will be filed. Filing late with those right is a better position than filing on time with either wrong, because India uses them to decide whether it will receive the group report through exchange or require a local filing instead. Keep a record of when the Indian entity learned of the gap.
Is the intimation still required once the due date has passed?
Yes. Lateness does not discharge it. India needs the information to decide how it will get the group report, either through exchange from the jurisdiction where the group files or from a filing in India, and that decision does not become unnecessary because the intimation is overdue. Filing also puts the group's own account of its reporting arrangements on the record before an officer builds one from other sources. Where the group's structure has moved since the period concerned, file the position as it stood then and say so, rather than describing today's arrangement.
Does a late 3CEAC mean India will demand a local report?
It can bear on it, which is the part worth understanding. The intimation is how India learns where the group report will be filed and by whom, and that is how India decides whether the report will reach it through exchange or whether a filing in India is needed instead. Silence leaves that question unanswered rather than answered in the group's favour. So the useful response to a missed intimation is to file it with the parent entity and the reporting jurisdiction correctly stated, so the decision is taken on the real arrangement. Guessing at either in order to file quickly is the wrong trade.
The group report was filed abroad on time, does that help?
It is the fact the intimation exists to report, and it matters, but it is not a substitute for the filing. India does not take the group report's existence abroad as read; the intimation is what tells it where the report sits and who is filing it. So a group that filed on time in its parent's jurisdiction and filed nothing in India has told India nothing. Collect the confirmation of what the parent filed and where, file the intimation on that basis, and keep the parent's acknowledgement with the Indian records. It is the evidence behind the statement the Indian entity has made.
Is there an exposure if the Indian entity owed no tax?
Yes. The obligation attaches to the Indian entity's position as a constituent entity of a group within country-by-country reporting, and the exposure attaches to the form and the delay rather than to a balance owing. A nil or loss-making year is therefore a year in which the filing was due and is now late. This is how many of these gaps arise: the filing is run off the tax return calendar, so a year with nothing to pay produces no prompt. Move it to a structural compliance calendar keyed to the group, and the years with no tax stop disappearing.
Several years of intimations are missing, do we file them all?
Deal with them together. Each period's intimation states the group's parent entity and reporting jurisdiction as they stood for that reporting period, and groups restructure, so filing the current period alone can leave earlier ones describing arrangements that never existed or contradicting the group's own papers. Reconstruct the position period by period from the restructuring documents, file the set, and note where and why the parent or the jurisdiction changed. A consistent history is easier to defend than one tidy period, and it is usually less work than doing them one at a time.
What is country-by-country reporting?
A report that the largest multinational groups file with their home authority, setting out revenue, profit, tax paid and accrued, capital, employees and tangible assets for every jurisdiction they operate in. It is exchanged between authorities and used for risk assessment, not to compute tax. Its effect on the ground is that inconsistency between the report, the local files and the statutory accounts is itself what draws attention. See our transfer pricing work.
What is the CUP method?
Comparable uncontrolled price. You find the price charged in a comparable transaction between unrelated parties and test your intercompany price against it. It is the most direct of the methods and the most persuasive when it fits, because it compares like with like at the transaction level. Its limit is data: close comparables exist for commodities and standard products, rarely for bespoke services or unique intangibles, which is where the margin-based methods take over. See our transfer pricing work.
