4Companies paying in Millions to acquire Intangibles WNS acquiring Marketics for $65 million.Facebook acquiring Friendfeed for $50 million
5Companies paying in BILLIONs to acquire Intangibles Vodafone acquiring Hutch for $19.3 billion.Google Inc. acquiring Youtube Inc. for $1.65 billion.
6Taxation of Royalty as per the Income-tax Act, 1961 (Act)
7Definition of Royalty u/s. 9(1) (vi) of the Act Imparting information on Technical/ Industrial/ Commercial/ Scientific knowledge, experience or skillUse of IPRsImparting of information on working of IPRsRoyaltyUse of Industrial/ Commercial/ Scientific Equipment except equipments mentioned in 44BBTransfer of rights in respect of IPRs
8Scope of Section 9(1)(vi) Status of PayerCoverageThe GovernmentNo exceptionIn all casesFor business / profession of payer outside IndiaFor source of income of payer outside India.Resident of IndiaExcluded only ifFor business / profession of payer in India.For source of income of payer in India.Included only ifNon-resident
9Taxability of Royalty Section Royalty Section 44DA If arising out of PE/ fixed place of professionSection 115ANo PE and in pursuance of agreement with the government or Indian concernSection 28Other cases e.g.. Resident making payment to a Resident
10Whether Royalty payments Made from Export Sales come under the exclusion clause?? Aktiengesellschaft Kuhnle Kopp & Kausch W. Germany vs. BHEL (262 ITR 513 Madras High Court)As far as export sales is concerned, that amount is also exempt under section 9(1)(vi) of the Act. Since the source of the royalty is from the source situate outside India, the royalty paid on export sales is not taxable.CIT vs. Havells India Ltd. (ITA No.55 & 57/2012, 21 May 2012) in which the Delhi High Court held –We are making a distinction between the source of the income and the source of the receipt of monies. In order to fall within the second exception provided in section 9(1)(vii)(b), the source of income and not receipt should be situated outside India.
11Genesis of Explanation to Clause (v), (vi) and (vii) Ishikawajima-Harima Heavy Industries’ (288 ITR 408 SC)Offshore services should be rendered in India AND used in India for income to be regarded as accruing in IndiaThere must be a direct link with IndiaThere must be sufficient territorial nexus to warrant imposition of taxExplanation added by Finance Act 2007, w.e.f updated by Finance Act, 2010Expl is inserted stating that where income is deemed to accrue or arise in India u/s. 9(1)(v),(vi) and (vii), such income shall be included in Total Income of Non-resident whether or not Non-resident has a place of business or Business Connection in India or has rendered services in India.
12Services in connection with the above Explanation 2 to Section 9(1)(vi) of the ActDescriptionIPRs► The transfer of all or any rights in respect of:► The imparting of any informationconcerning the working or use of:► The use of any:Patent, invention, model, design, secret formula or process or trademark or similar propertyThe imparting of any information concerningTechnical, industrial, commercial or scientific knowledge, experience or skill► The use or right to useIndustrial, commercial or scientificequipment► The transfer of all or any rights in respect ofCopyright, literary, artistic or scientific workServices in connection with the above
14Amendments by the Finance Act, 2012 Explanation 4Transfer of all or any rights includes right for or to use a computer software (including granting of a license) irrespective of the mediumExplanation 5Includes consideration in respect of any right, property or information, whether or not—the possession or control is with the payer;it is used directly by the payer;the location is in IndiaExplanation 6"process" includes transmission by satellite , cable, optic fibre, etc. whether or not secretRetrospective w.e.f. 1 June 1976
15CBDT ClarificationsNo re-opening of completed assessments on account of retrospective clarificatory amendments if:Assessment proceedings completed before 1 April 2012; andNo notice for reassessment been issued prior to 1 April 2012.Assessment or any other order which stands validated due to the clarificatory amendments would be enforced.(Letter F. No. 500/ FTD-l (Pt.) dated 29 May 2012)No withholding under section 194J on transfer of software to a resident where:Software acquired on subsequent transfer without any modification;Tax has been deducted on payment on any previous transfer;Transferee obtains a declaration that the tax has been deducted and PAN of the transferor.Effective from 1 July, 2012.(Notification No. 21/2012 dated 13 June 2012)
16Domestic Provsions vs. DTAA – Which will Prevail? B4U International Holdings Ltd. vs. DCIT (ITA No. 3326/Mum/2006 dated 28 May 2012)Coming to the agrument of the Learned Departmental Representative that the amendment to the Finanace Act, 2012 changes the posititon, we find that there is no change in the DTAA between India and USA. Thus, the amendments have no effect on our decision.DTAA provisions if beneficial to the assessee will reign over the provisions of the Act
17Taxability of Royalty –Tax Rates Income-tax ActTax TreatySection 44DANet 40%*Where PE existsArticle 7Net 40%Article 12Gross BasisAt treaty ratesSection 115AGross 25%*Where NO PE exists*Plus applicable surcharge & Education Cess
18Article 12: Royalty Definition Royalty: UN Model Convention (UN MC)Article 12: Royalty Definition
19Royalty – DefinitionThe term ―royalties as used in this article means payments of any kind received as a considerationfor the use of, or the right to use:any copyright of a literary, artistic or scientific work including cinematograph films, or films or tapes used for radio or television broadcasting,Patent and trademark,plan, design or model,secret formula or process,industrial, commercial or scientific equipmentor for information concerning industrial, commercial or scientific experience
20Royalty: OECD Model Convention (OECD MC) Article 12: Royalty Definition
21Royalty – DefinitionThe term ―royalties as used in this article means payments of any kind received as a considerationfor the use of, or the right to use:copyright of literary, artistic, or scientific work including cinematograph films,any patent, trade mark,design or model,plan, secret formula or process,or for information concerning industrial, commercial or scientific experience
22Royalty: Comparison under UN and OECD Model Convention
23Royalty – Article comparison Comparison of definitions: UN Model definition (as given below) v. OECD Model definition (part in bold fonts are included only in UN Model and not in OECD Model):Means payments of any kind received as a consideration for the use of, or the right to use, any copyright of literary, artistic or scientific work including cinematograph films, or films or tapes used for radio or television broadcasting, any patent, trade mark, design or model, plan, secret formula or process, or for the use of, or the right to use, industrial, commercial or scientific equipment or for information concerning industrial, commercial or scientific experience
24Royalty – Article comparison As per UN ModelAs per OECD ModelConsiderati on for use or right to usecopyright of literary, artistic, or scientific work including cinematograph films,any patent, trade mark,design or model,plan, secret formula or process,or for information concerning industrial, commercial or scientific experienceCopyright of films or tapes used for radio or television broadcastingindustrial, commercial or scientific equipment
25Taxability of Royalty as per OECD and UN Model OECD ModelUN ModelIf PE ExistsIf PE ExistsArticle 12 - RoyaltyNoNoYesYesYesArticle 7 – Permanent EstablishmentArticle 14 – If arising on performance of independent personnel from fixed place EstablishmentArticle 7- Permanent Establishment
27Income from Time Charter of Ship constitutes “Royalty” – Poompuhar Shipping Corporation Limited [TS-528-HC-2013(MAD)]Facts:Assessee is engaged in the business of shipping. Besides owning ship, it also charters ships for which it pays hire charges.Issue:Payment made for taking ship on time charter basis would constitute 'royalty' as defined under section 9(1)(vi)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act)?Assessee contended that ship was not equipment and consequently there was no question of right to use of any equipment which could be construed as royaltyI Co.Provides ship on time charter basisPaymentsF Co,
28TAXATION OF SOFTWARE It can be treated as Royalty Business Income - Sale of productCapital Gain – Sale of capital assetVarious facets of SoftwareComputer software generally described as a programme, or series of programmes, containing instructions for a computer required either for the operational process (system software) or for accomplishment of other tasks (application software)It can be transferred via variety of medium eg. tape, disc, fibre, wireless etc.It can be standardized with a wide range of applications or be tailor madeIt can be integrated in hardware or in independent form
29Characterisation of receipts from software supply Revenue AuthoritiesCharacterisation of receipts from software supplyTaxpayersSupply of software involves use / right to use of following:CopyrightProcessTaxable in India as royalty on gross basisSupply of software does not involve any use / right to use of copyright, patent, invention or processOECD MC –There is no use / right to use of copyright, patent, invention or processIt is business income not taxable in India in the absence of any permanent establishment in IndiaWhether Royalty?Whether Business Income?Software supplyIssue under litigation in a number of cases
30DIT vs. Infrasoft Ltd.  39 taxmann.com 88 (Delhi) The Assessee is a US resident software company engaged in the business of developing and manufacturing civil engineering software.The Assessee has a branch in India. The branch imports the software package in the form of floppy disks or CDs depending on the requirements of their customers.The software is used by private consultants for the design of highways, railways, airports, ports, and mines. The software was customized and then licensed to Indian customers.The branch of the Taxpayer in India performs services involving interface to peripheral installation and training.
31DIT vs. Infrasoft Ltd.Consideration forTransfer of CopyrightRoyaltyTransfer of Right to use the copyrightTransfer of copyrighted materialNo RoyaltyHeld: [Distinction between copyright and copyrighted article]
32DIT vs. Infrasoft Ltd.Held: [Disagreement with the Karnataka HC ruling in the case of Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.]In the case of Samsung, it was held that a right to make a copy of the software for the purpose of storing it in the hard disk of the designated computer and taking backup copy amounts to use of copyright and, hence, is a royalty transaction.According to the Delhi HC in case of Infrasoft Ltd., the right to make such a copy for the purpose of storage for its own use was only incidental to the facility extended to make use of the copyrighted product for the internal business purpose of the customer.This process was necessary to make the program functional and to have access to it and is integral to the use of the copyrighted product.This is qualitatively different from the right contemplated by the royalty provision as it does not amount to acquiring a copyright in the software.
33ADIT vsTII Team Telecom International (60 DTR 177) (Mum Trib) Ericsson (2011)16 taxmann.com371(Del HC)Novell Inc v. DDIT (2011) 16 taxmann.com 186 (Mum ITAT)Motorola Inc, (95 ITD 269)(Delhi SB)ADIT v. Tata Communications Ltd. (ITA 1473/Mum/2009)DassaultSystems K.K. [2010-TIOL-02-ARA-IT]Solid Works Corporation (Mum) (Trib)DIT v. Infrasoft Limited  (Delhi) 39 taxmann.com 88 Samsung Electronics (2011) 16 taxmann.com 141 (KarHC)Sunray Computers (2011) 16 taxmann.com 268 (KarHC)AcclerysKK, In re e (2012-TII-10-ARA-INTL)Citrix Systems Asia Pacific Pty. Ltd. (AAR)Millennium IT Software Ltd. (2011) 14 taxmann.com 17Microsoft Corporation vs. ADIT (2010-TII-141-ITAT-DEL-INTL)GracemacVs ADIT (ITA Nos /Del/2008)
34Definition of Royalty - DTAA Majority treaties of India do not explicitly include ‘compute software’ in the definition of RoyaltySpecific language including ‘computer software’ in the royalty definition in India’s treaty with the following countries :MalaysiaMoroccoNamibiaRussiaTrinidad & TobagoKazakhstanKyrgyz Republic
35EMBEDDED SOFTWARE – ROYALTY?? Supply of integrated equipment comprising hardware and software where the supply of software is inextricably linked to supply of the hardware and, both, the hardware and the software, cannot function without each otherJudicial view emerging :Revenue authorities should not split the transaction to separately tax the payment for softwareFurther, purchase of software is akin to purchase of a copyrighted article and not purchase of any rights in the softwareLucent Technologies Hindustan Ltd. v. ITO (92 ITD 366)Motorola, Ericson and Nokia 96 TTJ 1 (Del SB)SunaryComputers (P) Ltd 204 Taxman 1 (Karnataka) (HC)
36THE ROAD AHEAD…. No DTAA with India DTAA with India DTAA with India Under Income-tax Act, 1961Treaty definition specifically covers ‘computer software’Treaty definition DOES NOT specifically cover ‘computer software’Taxpayers to withhold tax on software paymentsTaxpayers to withhold tax on software paymentsLitigative
37Taxation of Satellite/ Transponders payments – Mechanics Outside IndiaUplinking of signalIndiaFoot print AreaSignals downlinked by Co.Satellite CompanyTransponder hire chargesBroadcasting issues
38Viacom 18 Media Pvt. Ltd vs. ADIT (TS-179-ITAT-2014 (Mum) Facts:The assessee, engaged in broadcasting television channels from India, received transponder service from Intelsat, a tax resident of USA, in lieu of a fee.The assessee approached to the AO under 195(2) of I-T Act for Nil withholding tax certificates, for such payment of fees to Intelsat, which was denied by the AO and held that the payments made are in nature of Royalty
39Held:The introduction of Explanation 6 by Finance Act 2012 w.r.e.f is clarificatory in nature and, therefore, it does not amend the definition of royalty per seAny payment for use or right to use of process is in the nature of royalty as per the provisions of Article 12(3) of DTAA as well as per the Explanation 2 of section 9(1)(vi) of the Act.Since the term 'process' is not defined under the DTAA, therefore, by virtue of Article 3(2) of the India-US DTAA, the meaning of term 'process' as defined in the Act would apply for this purposeThe use of transponder by the assessee for telecasting/broadcasting the Programme involves the transmission by the satellite including up-linking, amplification, conversion for downlinking of signals which falls in the expression 'process' as per Explanation 6 of section 9(1)(vi) and thus payment is in nature of ‘Royalty’
40Some Conflicting Decisions Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co Ltd (2011) 332 ITR 340 (Del) – Pre AmendmentChannel Guide India Ltd. v. ACIT, 25 taxmann.com 25(Mum Trib) – Post AmendmentB4U International Holdings Ltd. v. DCIT, 23 taxmann.com 372 – Post AmendmentISRO Satellite Centre, In re (2008) 307 ITR 59 (AAR) - Pre AmendmentNew Skies Satellite NV  121 ITD 1 (Delhi) (SB) - Pre AmendmentAsianet Communications Ltd (2010) 38 SOT 158 (Mad) – Pre AmendmentViacom 18 Media Pvt. Ltd. [ TS-179-ITAT-2014] – Post Amendment
41Taxation of Fees for technical services as per the Act
42Source Rule – Fees for Technical Services Section 9(1)(vii) of the act provides that the income by the way of FTS shall be deemed to accrue or arise in India, if it is payable byThe government, orA resident, except where the fees are payablefor services utilised in a business or profession carried on by such person outside India, orfor the purpose or making or earning any income from any source outside IndiaA non-resident where the fees are payable.for services utilised in a business or profession carried on by such person in India , orfor the purpose or making or earning any income from any source in India.
43Meaning of ‘Fees for Technical Services’ Consideration including any lump sum considerationManagerial serviceTechnicalservicesConsultancyProvision of services of technical or other personnelDoes not include consideration for any construction, assembly, mining or like project undertaken by its recipient or consideration which would be chargeable under the head salaries.
44Managerial servicesThe Oxford Dictionary gives the following meanings to the term “manage”: have control of, be manager of, operate a tool etc., contrive, deal with person tactfully.The term “managerial” was observed by AAR in case of Intertek services Indian P. Ltd. 175 Taxman 375 as -Manager is a person who manages industry or business or who deals with administration or the person who organizes other people’s activity. Managerial services essentially involves controlling, directing or administrating the businessManagerial & Consultancy Services can be overlapping: - Raymond Ltd. V/s DCIT (86 ITD 791)
45Technical servicesIn the absence of any definition in law, general meaning needs to be adoptedOxford Dictionary: of a particular subject, craft, etc. Requiring specialized knowledge to be understood (professional qualification may not be necessary) of applied science and mechanical art; according to strict legal interpretation.Deduction in respect of royalties, etc., from certain foreign enterprises—technical services—whether managerial services are covered by the term 'technical services'—managerial services do not include any use of tools and machinery while technical services should include the use of tools and machinery. Hence not covered, - J.K. (Bombay)Ltd. V. CBDT (1979) 118 ITR 312 (Delhi HC).Delivery service requires human intervention and thus, rendering services via sophisticated technology does not amount to technical services CIT v/s Bharti Cellular Limited (330 ITR 239)
46Consultancy services“Consult” means to seek information or advice. It can be written or oralProvision of advise by someone, such as a professional who has special qualificationsMay overlap with technical and managerial services, if provided by a consultantHyderabad Tribunal decision in the case of Tecumseh Products (I) Ltd. v. DCIT  13 SOT 489 – relevant observations:“technical service does not include providing some technical knowledge for manufacturing alone. Technical knowledge includes, management or consultancy services.”
47Provision of services of technical or other personnel Caborandum Co. V CIT (1977) 108 ITR 335 -SCWhere an American Company had deputed its employees to an Indian Company. Indian Company entered into employment Agreement with deputed employees, the Indian Company paid salaries to these employees which were under the control of Indian company, held it is taxable as salary and not FTS.Mannesmann Demag Lauchhammer V. CIT (1988) 26 ITD 198 – HYD ITATWhere a machinery was imported and post warranty period technical faults were found and and subsequently an agreement was entered with the German company who sent an engineer to India for repair. Payment was made on a per day basis by the Indian Co. along with cost of travel, boarding and lodging it was held to be ‘Provision Of services of Technical personnel’ since it specifically includes in Explanation to S.9(1)(vii).
49Payments for use of ‘Standard Facility’ Skycell Communications Ltd. v/s DCIT (251 ITR 53)Madras High court held that the fees received for providing a cellular mobile telephone services was for use of ‘standard facility’.The fact that the assessee has installed sophisticated technical equipment in the exchange to ensure connectivity to its subscriber, does not on that score, make it a provision of a technical service to the subscriber.It was contended that the mere collection of a fee for use of a standard facility provided to all those willing to pay for it, does not amount to the fee having been received for technical services
50Payment for hosting website abroad, subscribing to Online databases etc... Millennium Infocomm Technologies Ltd V/s. ACIT (117 ITD 114)ITAT held that providing of hosting space in servers located abroad does not result in providing any technical services and will not be considered as Fees for Technical Services.Cargo Community Network (p.) Ltd (AAR No. 668 of 2006)Assessee engaged in the business of providing access to internet based Air cargo portal and payments were made by resident of India for use of portal.AAR took a harsh view that payments for accessing portal hosted in Singapore was both royalty (for use of equipment) and FTS in terms of subscribers and help desk support in India.Millennium infocom Technologies Ltd. Vs. ACIT ( ITD 114 held that services providing of hosting space in servers abroad will not be considered as provision of technical services to Indian assessee.
51Payments for mineral oil exploration and related activities Applies to NR engaged in the business of providing : Services/ facilities in connection with prospecting or extracting or production of mineral oils and supplying plant and machinery on hire used/to be used in prospecting or extracting or production of mineral oils.Deems total income of non of gross receipts, effective tax rate to Non-resident - 4%Section 44BB shall apply only if the payments are not covered under the definition of Fees for Technical Services
52Applicability of Section 44BB Services should not be covered under Section 9(1)(vii)ORIf covered, should fall within exclusion of 9(1)(vii) – ‘’consideration for any construction, assembly, mining or like project undertaken by the recipient’’ANDServices/facilities should be in connection with prospecting or extracting or production of mineral oils
53OHM Ltd [TS-879-HC-2012(Del)] Sec 44BB is a special provision whereas Sec 44DA is broader and more general in nature. Since the specific provision excludes the general provision, provision of geophysical services like, procuring, processing and interpreting data in respect of an offshore exploration block in India attracts Section 44BB and not 44DA.Decisions in favor - 44BB applies to cases in which the services (including technical services) are rendered in relation to the prospecting for or exploration of mineral oil. :ACIT vs. Paradigm Geophysical(P) Ltd. (117 TTJ 812) (Del)DCIT vs. Schlumberger Seaco Inc (50 ITD 346)DIT( Int’l Tax) vs. Jindal Drilling Industries Ltd. (ITA No. 3416/Del/2003)
55Meaning of FTS under Tax Treaties FTS covers managerial, technical or consultancy services akin to the ITA, but may not have the same exclusions as under the ITA.India-Singapore Tax Treaty – Relevant Extract"fees for technical services" as used in this Article means payments of any kind to any person in consideration for services of a managerial, technical or consultancy nature (including the provisions of such services through technical or other personnel) if such services:a) ...’’Definition of FTS under various treaties may be broadly categorized as under –Type 1 – Absence of clause on FTS eg. Mauritius, Myanmar, Philippines,Type 2 – Definition largely at par with ITA eg. JapanType 3 – Definition contains further condition like ‘make available’ eg. USA, UK, Canada, Netherlands, SingaporeType 4 – Protocol to Treaty - restricts the scope of definition through Most Favoured Nation (MFN) clause eg. Belgium, France, Hungary, Israel, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland 10
56Fees for included services DTAAs signed by India having the concept of FTS/ FIS along with the make available‘ clause (such as Canada, Cyprus, USA, Netherlands, UK)Deals with Technical Services but, coverage is of FISDefinition of FIS (Refer for example Indo - US Treaty)―For purposes of this article, “fees for included services” means payments of any kind to any person in consideration for the rendering of any technical or consultancy services (including through the provision of services of technical or other personnel) if such services:a)………….b)make available technical knowledge, experience, skill, know-how, or processes, or consist of the development and transfer of a plan or technical design.”
57Fees for Included Services MoU of the India USA Tax Treaty:Technology will be considered "made available" when the person acquiring the service is enabled to apply the technologyThe fact that the provision of the service may require technical input by the person providing the service does not per se mean that technical knowledge, skills, etc., are made available to the person purchasing the service, within the meaning of paragraph 4(b)Similarly, the use of a product which embodies technology shall not per se be considered to make the technology availableIf the services do not ―make available‖ technical knowledge, etc., then, they are outside the ambit of FIS Article and may not be taxable. However, the same may be considered as business income and taxable if the foreign company has a PE in India
58Fees for included services Understanding Concept of FISExtract from Raymond Ltd. V/s. DCIT [86 ITD 791](Mum)―….. the normal, plain and grammatical meaning of the language employed, in our understanding, is that a mere rendering of services is not roped in unless the person utilising the services is able to make use of the technical knowledge, etc. by himself in his business or for his own benefit and without recourse to the performer of the services in future. The technical knowledge, experience, skill, etc. must remain with the person utilising the services even after the rendering of the services has come to an end. A transmission of the technical knowledge, experience, skills, etc. from the person rendering the services to the person utilising the same is contemplated by the Article. Some sort of durability or permanency of the result of the “rendering of services” is envisaged which will remain at the disposal of the person utilising the services. The fruits of the services should remain available to the person utilising the services in some concrete shape such as technical knowledge, experience, skills, etc.”
59Fees for included services MOU signed between India and USA is binding on other countries Tax Treaty?Favourable ordersIntertekTesting Services India P Ltd. (307 ITR 418) (AAR)CESC Ltd. (275 ITR 15) (Kolkata)Boston Consultancy Group P Ltd .(94 ITD 31) (Mum)Mckinsey& Co. Inc. (99 ITD 549)Raymond Ltd. (80 TTJ 120) (Mum)Bharti Axa(326 ITR 477) (AAR)Unfavourable ordersAAR ruling in the case of PerfettiVan MelleHolding B.V.(AAR No. 869 of 2010) dated 9 December 2011AAR ruling in the case of Shell India Markets Pvt Ltd(AAR No. 833 of 2009) dated 17 January 2012
61[DCIT v. Boston Consulting Group PteLtd 93 TTJ 293 (Mum)] FactsWhether ‘Make Available’?DecisionTechnical assistance to enable service recipient to design, construct and operate a plant to manufacture aluminum. Training for application of technical know how India – US DTAAyHindalco Industries Ltd. v. ACIT [(2005) 94 TTJ 944 (Mum)]Payment for services to make available executive personnel for development of general management, finance and purchasing, marketing and assemble/ manufacturing activities under the management provision agreement India –US DTAANP No. 28 of 1999 AAR –242 ITR 0208Strategy consultancy services such as marketing and sales strategy, business strategy and portfolio strategy India –Singapore DTAA[DCIT v. Boston Consulting Group PteLtd 93 TTJ 293 (Mum)]
62Payment for providing training to crew members India –UK DTAA FactsWhether ‘Make Available’?DecisionService of the grading and certification reports for diamonds and other articlesIndia –Singapore DTAANDiamond Services International P Limited v. Union of India (Bom) –304 ITR 201Payment for providing training to crew membersIndia –UK DTAASahara Airlines Ltd v. DyCIT –83 ITD 11Payment for operational and support services India –Netherland DTAAYPerfettiVan MelleHolding B.V. -AAR No. 869 of 2010)Data processing services agreementR. R. Donnelley India Outsource (P) Ltd. –335 ITR 122Publicity, advertisement and sales servicesIndia –USA DTAADIT vsSheraton Ltd. –313 ITR 267