DCIT, INTERNATIONALTAXATION,CIRCLE-1(3)(1), NEW DELHI vs. GEMCOM SOFTWARE AUSTRALIA PTY LTD, PERTH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7452/DEL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 September 2021AY 2014-153 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the CBDT's circular revised the monetary limit for appeals to Rs. 50 Lacs and applied it to pending appeals. Consequently, the appeal with a low tax effect was not maintainable.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order deleting additions made by the AO regarding royalty income from software distribution. The assessee pointed out that the tax effect was below the revised monetary limit for appeals.

What were the issues?

Whether the consideration for software distribution is royalty under the India-Australia DTAA and Section 9 of the IT Act. Whether the appeal is maintainable due to low tax effect.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 9

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI “D” BENCH: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI & SHRI KUL BHARAT

For Respondent: Adv. &
Hearing: 06.09.2021Pronounced: 06.09.2021

ORDER PER KUL BHARAT, JM : The present appeal filed by Revenue for the assessment year 2014- 15 is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-42, New Delhi dated 25.09.2017. The Revenue has raised following grounds of appeal:-

1.1. “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made by the AO holding that the consideration received by the assessee for sale/distribution of software to the Indian entity cannot be taxed a royalty as provided in the Article 12 of the India-Australia DTAA? 1.2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the additions made by the AO and not considering the explanation 5 & 5 to section 9 of the Income Tax Act, 1961?

1.3 Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in relying on the case of DIT Vs Infrasoft ltd. (Delhi) regardless of the facts that an appeal has been field before the Hon'ble Supreme Court against the order for adjudication? 2. The appellant craves leave to add, modify, amend or alter any grounds of appeal at the time of, or before, the hearing of appeal.”

2.

However, Ld. Counsel for the assessee pointed out that the present appeal pertaining to Assessment Year 2014-15 deserves to be withdrawn as the tax effect involved in the case is below Rs.50 Lacs.

3.

Ld. Sr. DR could not controvert the submissions of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee.

4.

The CBDT vide Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 has revised the monetary limit for filing the appeals before the Tribunal to Rs.50 Lacs.

Further, CBDT vide letter dated 20.08.2019 has also clarified that Circular No.17/2019 would be applicable to all pending appeals. In such circumstances, the present appeal filed by the Revenue in case of low tax effect is not maintainable.

5.

Before parting, we clarify here that the Revenue shall be at liberty to approach the Tribunal for re-institution of appeal, if the requisite material is brought to show that the appeal is protected by the exceptions prescribed in para 10 of the Circular dated 11.07.2018.

6.

In conclusion, by applying the CBDT Circular dated 08.08.2019 and letter dated 20.08.2019 (supra), the captioned appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as withdrawn/not pressed.

7.

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed.

Above decision was pronounced on conclusion of Virtual Hearing in the presence of both the parties on 06th September, 2021.

More judgments on Section 9

All 529 judgments and leading authorities on Section 9 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →