DCIT(IT)-2(1)(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. DELOITTE HASKIN & SELLS LLP, MUMBAI

ITA 4653/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 December 2025Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the payments made for Global Brand, Communications, and Technology/Knowledge Management services do not constitute royalty under Article 13(3) of the India-UK DTAA. Consequently, the assessee was not required to deduct tax at source on these payments.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order holding that payments made by the assessee to Deloitte Global Holdings Services Limited for Global Brand, Communications, and Technology services were not royalty under the India-UK DTAA. The assessee had sought authorization for remittance without TDS.

What were the issues?

Whether payments for global brand, communications, and technology services under a shared services agreement constitute 'royalty' under the India-UK DTAA, thus requiring TDS.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 195

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(11)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘I’ BENCH

Before: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwala / Shri, Shri Ashesh
For Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr.DR
Hearing: 17/11/2025Pronounced: 17/12/2025

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No.4654/Mum/2025
ITA No.4655/Mum/2025

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

PER AMIT SHUKLA (J.M): These appeals have been filed by the Revenue against the consolidated order dated 04.04.2025 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)–56, Mumbai, arising out of proceedings under section 195 of the Income- tax Act, 1961 for the assessment years 2020–21 and 2021–22 and under section 143(3) for the assessment year 2015–16. Since the issues involved in all these appeals are identical, emanate from the same set of facts, arise out of the same Shared Services Agreement, and are founded on an identical line of reasoning adopted by the As

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 195

All 2,836 judgments and leading authorities on Section 195 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →