GODADDY.COM LLC vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(3)(1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA - 75 / 2023HC Delhi10 February 20232 pages
For Petitioner: KALRAV MEHROTRA
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court admitted the appeal and framed a specific question of law. The core of the dispute is whether income from domain registration services constitutes 'royalty' under Section 9(1)(vi) of the Income Tax Act.

What were the facts?

The appeal concerns Assessment Year 2015-2016 and involves a common question of law with other connected appeals. The appellant is challenging the Tribunal's decision regarding the classification of income.

What were the issues?

The key legal issue is whether income derived from domain registration services qualifies as royalty under the Income Tax Act, 1961. This determination is crucial for the taxability of such income.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 9(1)(vi)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~18 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ ITA 75/2023

GODADDY.COM LLC

..... Appellant Through: Mr G.C. Srivastava and Mr Kalrav Mehrotra, Advs.

versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(3)(1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Mr Puneet Rai, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr Nikhil Jain, Adv.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU

O R D E R %

10.02.2023 [Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)] 1. This appeal concerns Assessment Year (AY) 2015-2016. 2. We are told that insofar as the other AYs are concerned, the appeals filed by the appellant have been admitted and a question of law has been framed. 3. Learned counsel for the parties inform us that the question of law is common to the instant appeal as well as the connected appeals, i.e., ITA Nos.261/2019 and 891/2018. 4. Accordingly, the instant appeal is admitted and the following question of law is framed : Whether in the facts of the case and in law, the Tribunal erred in holding that the income received by the appellant as a consideration for providing domain registration services amounted to „royalty‟ under Section 9(1)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961?

ITA 75/2023

page 1 of 2 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 13:34:17

5.

List the appeal on 27.02.2023. 6. Learned counsel for the parties will file their written submissions, not exceeding three pages each, at least five days before the next date of hearing.

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J

TARA VITASTA GANJU, J

FEBRUARY 10, 2023

Click here to check corrigendum, if any

ITA 75/2023

page 2 of 2 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 13:34:17

More judgments on Section 9(1)(vi)

All 1,705 judgments and leading authorities on Section 9(1)(vi) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →