BBC WORLD DISTRIBUTION LIMITED,UNITED KINGDOM vs. DCIT, CIRCLE INT. TAX. 1(1)(2), NEW DELHI

IT(IT)A Nos. 86 to 94 /Del/2025 BBC WORLD DISTRIBUTION LTD.

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “D” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अ.सं/.I.T.(IT)A Nos.86 to 94/Del/2025 निर्धारणवर्ा/Assessment Years: 2015-16 to 2023-24 BBC WORLD DISTRIBUTION LIMITED, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF बिधम 1 Television Centre, Wood Lane, 101, INCOME TAX, Circle International Vs. Wood Lane, London, W12 7FA, Tax 1(1)(2), Room No.313, Civic United Kingdom, Foreign. Centre, Minto Road, New Delhi, PAN No.AACCB7999Q Delhi 110002. अपीलधर्थी Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent

Assesseee by Shri M.P. Lohia, Advocate, Shri Ashish Agarwal, CA Shri Anurag Singhal, CA & Ms. Jyotsana Thareja, CA Revenue by Shri Vikram Singh Sharma, Sr. DR

सुिवधईकीतधरीख/ Date of hearing: 04.05.2026 उद्घोर्णधकीतधरीख/Pronouncement on 13.05.2026 आदेश /O R D E R PER BENCH:

1.1 This appeal arises from impugned order dated 30.10.2025, passed by Ld. CIT(A), Delhi-42, u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter as “the Act”). In this case, the Ld. AO-CPC treated the distribution income of Rs.4,05,16,820/- as royalty and as a consequence of this action enhanced

IT(IT)A Nos. 86 to 94 /Del/2025 BBC WORLD DISTRIBUTION LTD. the income of the assessee. Aggrieved with this action of Ld. AO-CPC the assessee approached the Ld. CIT(A) where he could not succeed on the basis of a delay of 8 years 10 months not being condoned u/s 249(3) of the Act. It is seen that there is considerable discussion on the aspect of delay and why the same did not deserve to be condoned.

1.2 The assessee has approached the ITAT with five grounds of appeal as under: -

“On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Appellant respectfully craves leave to prefer an appeal under section 253 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act') against the order passed by the Hon'ble Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Delhi - 42 [‘Hon'ble CIT(A)'] dated 30 October 2025 under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') on the following grounds, which are without prejudice to each other: General 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble CIT(A) erred in treating the distribution income of Rs.4,05,16,820 taxable as Royalty and thereby taxes of Rs.60,77,523 deposited thereon is collected excessively in violation of the provisions of the Act. Distribution fee received for granting rights for distribution of TV channel does not constitute 'Royalty' under the India-UK Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement ('DTAA') 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in rejecting the application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal under section 246A of the Act. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in rejecting the fresh claim merely because it was not made in the return of income, despite having plenary appellate powers and the settled principle that there is no estoppel in law to make a legitimate claim even if it results in income lower than the returned income. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) has erred in not adjudicating on the Appellant's

IT(IT)A Nos. 86 to 94 /Del/2025 BBC WORLD DISTRIBUTION LTD. contention that the distribution fee of Rs. 4,05,16.820 eamed for granting distribution rights in relation to the TV channel (BBC News) does not fall within the definition of "Royalty" under section 9(1)(vi) of the Act or Article 13 of the India-UK DTAA, and accordingly, is not chargeable to tax in India. 5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in not directing the Ld. AO to grant refund of Rs.60,77,523, being the tax deducted at source on the distribution fee earned by the Appellant during the relevant year. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, vary, omit, substitute or amend the above grounds of appeal, at any time before or at the time of appeal, so as to enable the Hon'ble Tribunal to decide the appeal in accordance with the law.” 2. Before us the Ld. AR argued that the assessee had good justification for seeking condonation of delay and on similar facts for AY 2024-25 [ITA No.7619/Del/2025, order dated 23.04.2026], a coordinate bench of ITAT, has duly remanded the matter back to the file of Ld. JAO for fresh consideration. The Ld. AR placed on record the order of coordinate bench (supra), where one of us was a Member. The Ld. AR read out extensively from paras 3.1 & 4 of the ITAT’s order and requested for remanding this matter back to the file of Ld. JAO, as has been done for AY 2024-25.

2.1 The ld. DR relied on the orders of the authorities below.

IT(IT)A Nos. 86 to 94 /Del/2025 BBC WORLD DISTRIBUTION LTD. “3.1 Brief facts related to this issue are that the assessee itself had offered distribution fee received of Rs.2,55,08,846/- as taxable in its hands as "Royalty while filing its return for A.Y. 2014-15 and TDS @15% as per Article 13 of India-UK DTAA was also deducted. The CPC, while processing the return u/s 143(1) accepted the returned income without making any adjustment. However subsequently, in assessee's own case for A.Ys. 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09, the issue was decided in favour of the assessee by the ITAT as well as the Hon'ble High Court. This led the assessee to file an appeal before Ld. CIT(A) against section 143(1) order belatedly raising this ground for the first time. The assessee also applied for condonation of delay before the Id. CIT(A) on the ground that the impugned amount was shown in income adopting a conservative approach as there was lack of clarity on taxability of TV channel distribution fees till the matter was finally decided in assessee's favour by the Hon'ble High Court. Ld. CIT(A) however, did not condone the delay and dismissed the appeal in limine. Ld. CIT(A) observed in her order that the reasons of delay given by the assessee are not bona fide as it filed the return for A.Y. 2024-25 much after the favourable decision of ITAT in earlier years and still declared the impugned amount as Income in the return. Further, she held that condonation would cause serious prejudice to the interests of revenue as the AO cannot examine and verify the claim and moreover no adjustment was made by the CPC while passing order u/s 143(1) and therefore the issue fell outside the scope of appeal. Further aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material placed on record as well as the relevant judicial pronouncements. After careful consideration of the facts and circumstances as well as various decisions and the CBDT circular dated 11.04.1955 stating that only legitimate tax must be assessed and collected, relied upon by the Id. AR. Although this claim has been raised for the first time before the appellate authority, in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the matter to Ld. J.A.O. for denovo consideration and to decide the issue on merits after giving due opportunity of being heard to the assessee.”

3.1 Considering the order for AY 2024-25 and since the facts are identical for this year also hence, we deem it fit to set aside the impugned order and remand this matter back to the file of Ld. JAO for fresh assessment. It may be mentioned that we are refraining from commenting on the merit of the case at this stage. 4

IT(IT)A Nos. 86 to 94 /Del/2025 BBC WORLD DISTRIBUTION LTD. 4. In the remaining eight matters, the facts are the same whereby delays ranging from one year to eight years have not been condoned and the appeals have been dismissed in limine. It deserves to be held that the decision rendered for IT(IT)A No.86/Del/2025 shall apply mutantis mutandis to the remaining eight matters also.

Order pronounced in the open court on 13.05.2026

Sd/- Sd/- (VIKAS AWASTHY) (SANJAY AWASTHI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated:13.05.2026 *Kavita Arora, Sr. P.S. Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI