SIEMENS MOBILITY GMBH,GERMANY vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(INTERNATIONAL TAX), 4(2)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 4713/MUM/2023Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 February 2025Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), MS PADMAVATHY S (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the issue of taxability of FTS on an accrual basis is covered by a coordinate bench decision in Siemens AG's case, which ruled in favour of the assessee. It was also held that the assessee and Siemens Limited do not constitute an Association of Persons (AOP).

What were the facts?

The assessee, Siemens Mobility GmbH, a German company, appealed against an assessment order for AY 2021-22. The Assessing Officer (AO) made additions for royalty and fees for technical services (FTS) on an accrual basis, and also treated software receipts as royalty. The assessee argued for taxation on a receipt basis and that software supply did not involve copyright parting.

What were the issues?

Whether royalty and fees for technical services are taxable on an accrual basis or receipt basis, and whether the supply of software constitutes royalty income. The tribunal also examined the constitution of an AOP between the assessee and Siemens Limited.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 144C(13),Section 5(2)(a),Section 5(2)(b),Section 69A,Section 234A,Section 234B,Section 270A,Section 153(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(9)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, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JM &

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Josh a/w Bhavin, Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR
Hearing: 12.02.2025Pronounced: 27.02.2025

Per Padmavathy S, AM: This appeal by the assessee is against the final order of assessment passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (International Tax), Circle-4(2)(1), Mumbai [for short 'the AO] under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) dated 30.10.2023 for the AY 2021-22. The assessee raised the following ground of appeal:- "

1.

The AO erred in determining the Appellant's total income at Rs. 70,41,65,874 in the Assessment Order and Rs. 71,67,05,874 in the Computation Sheet as against the returned income of Rs. 54,42,88,930. 2. Without prejudice, the AO erred in determining the Appel

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 144C(13)

All 3,426 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144C(13) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →