THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -3 vs. SALESFORCE.COM SINGAPORE PTE. LTD.

PDF · subscribers
ITA - 567 / 2024HC Delhi11 December 20243 pages
For Petitioner: RUCHIR BHATIA
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The ITAT, following decisions for earlier assessment years, held that the receipts were not chargeable as fees for technical services. The High Court, noting its own previous decision in the assessee's case for an earlier year, found no substantial question of law arose and dismissed the Revenue's appeal.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed an ITAT order concerning the taxability of payments received by Salesforce.com Singapore Pte. Ltd. for providing Customer Relationship Management (CRM) Services for AY 2018-19. The Revenue contended these payments were chargeable to tax as fees for technical services under the Income Tax Act and the India-Singapore DTAA.

What were the issues?

Whether payments received for providing Customer Relationship Management (CRM) Services constitute Fees for Technical Services under Section 9(1)(vii) of the Income Tax Act or Article 12(4) of the India-Singapore DTAA.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A,Section 9(1)(vii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)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.

$~68 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 567/2024

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -3

.....Appellant Through: Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Sr. Standing Counsel, Mr. Anant Mann, Jr. tanding Counsel and Mr. Abhishek Anand, Advocate.

versus

SALESFORCE.COM SINGAPORE PTE. LTD. .....Respondent

Through: Mr. Vishal Kalra, Advocate

CORAM:

HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA

O R D E R %

11.12.2024

1.

The Revenue has filed the present appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter the Act) impugning an order 17.05.2024 passed by the Ld. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereafter the ITAT). 2. It is material to note that the said impugned order is a common order in respect of four appeals concerning assessment years (AY 2018-19 to AY 2021-2022). The present appeal is confined to impugned order in so far as it relates to the Assessee’s appeal being ITA No. 1923/DEL/2022 in respect of the AY 2018-2019. The controversy involved in the present appeal relates to the payments received by the Assessee for providing Customer Relationship Management (CRM) Services. According to the Revenue, the payment for the said services are chargeable to tax as fees for technical This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/03/2026 at 12:31:52

services under the Act as well as under the India-Singapore Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA). Learned ITAT examined the issue and following the decision in respect of earlier AYs, held that the receipts were not chargeable as fees for technical services. 3. In the aforesaid context, the Revenue has projected the following questions for consideration of this Court:-

“2.1 Whether Ld. ITAT has erred in law by holding that the payments received on account of subscription fees does not constitute Fee for Technical Services under Explanation to section 9(l)(vii) of the Act or under sub Article (4) of the Article 12 of the India- Singapore DTAA ignoring that services provided by Assessee includes Customer Relationship Management Software to customers enabling better operational efficiency for the business and thus fulfilling conditions of Article 12(4) of the India- Singapore DTAA and section 9(l)(vii) of the Act? 2.2 Whether Ld. ITAT has erred in law by holding that the subscription fee received is not taxable as Fee for Technical services under India- Singapore DTAA ignoring the fact that CRM software solutions was made available to the Indian customer users, so that they can use this data analysis independently without the support of services company and training is also provided to employees to Indian customer - users for the same, which is in the nature Fees for technical services under India Singapore DTAA?”

4.

Mr. Bhatia, learned counsel for the revenue states at the outset that the aforesaid questions are covered by the decision of this Court in assessee’s own case for earlier assessment year - Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Salesforce.com Singapore Pte. Ltd.: (2024) 465 ITR 257. 5. In view of above, no substantial question arise for consideration of This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/03/2026 at 12:31:52

this Court. 6. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.

VIBHU BAKHRU, ACJ

TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J DECEMBER 11, 2024/ms

Click here to check corrigendum, if any This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/03/2026 at 12:31:52

More judgments on Section 9(1)(vii)

All 1,640 judgments and leading authorities on Section 9(1)(vii) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →