M/S LOGIN INFOTECH PVT LTD,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-4(1)(1), BANGALORE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted the Supreme Court ruling that software sale/purchase is not royalty. However, it found that the assessee had not conclusively established it merely purchased a copyrighted article. Therefore, the matter was restored to the AO for fresh examination.
What were the facts?
The assessee, a software trading company, made payments in foreign currency for software imports. The Assessing Officer disallowed the expenditure under Section 40(a)(i) for non-deduction of TDS under Section 195. The CIT(A) upheld the disallowance.
What were the issues?
Whether import of software attracts TDS provisions under Section 195, leading to disallowance of expenditure under Section 40(a)(i) if tax is not deducted. Whether the payment for software constitutes royalty.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show listHide 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.
- Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence (P) Ltd. v. CIT914 citing432 ITR 471 · 2021 · SC · Read judgment
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BANGALORE BENCHES “B”, BANGALORE
Before: Shri George George K, JM & Shri B.R.Baskaran, AM
O R D E R
Per George George K, JM
This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the CIT(A)’s order dated 24.11.2017. The relevant assessment year is 2013-2014.
The solitary issue raised is whether import of software attracted the provisions of section 195 of the I.T.Act and non- deduction of tax would amount to disallowance of expenditure u/s 40(a)(i) of the I.T.Act.
Brief facts of the case are as follow: The assessee is a company engaged in the business of trading of computer peripherals, accessories and software. For the assessment year 2013-2014, return of income was filed on 30.09.2013 declaring income of Rs.5,90,490. The assessment u/s 143(3) of the I.T.Act was passed vide order dated 29.02.2016, wherein the A.O. had made a disallowance of Rs.1,00,16,998 by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(i) of the I.T.Act. The A.O. held that the payment of Rs.1,00,16,998 made to various foreign entities in foreign
. M/s.Login Infotech Private Limited. currency was to be disallowed as a business expenditure, since the assessee has not withheld tax on making such payment as prescribed u/s 195 of the I.T.Act.
Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal to the first appellate authority. The CIT(A) confirmed the view of the Assessing Officer,
Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee has filed this appeal before the Tribunal. The learned AR submitted that the issue in question is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence P.Ltd. v. CIT reported in [2021] 432 ITR 471 (SC), wherein it was categorically held that sale of software would not constitute royalty within the provisions of section 9(1)(vi) of the I.T.Act and Article 12 of the DTAA between India and USA.
The learned Departmental Representative supported the orders of the Income Tax Authorities.
We have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. In the instant case, the CIT(A) has confirmed the disallowance made by the A.O. u/s 40(a)(i) of the I.T.Act for the reason that the assessee has not given party-wise details with regard to the payment made in foreign currency. It was further held by the CIT(A) that the field activities were not highlighted by the assessee so as to conclude that it was engaged in mere trading and that no software-licences (or certain extent of user) was involved in . M/s.Login Infotech Private Limited. the process. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that sale of software or purchase of software per se would not come within the term “royalty”. However, in the instant case it has not been conclusively established by the assessee that it merely purchased a copywrited article. Therefore, we are of the view that the matter needs to be examined by the A.O. in the light of the recent judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence P.Ltd. v. CIT (supra), relied on by the assessee. Accordingly, the issue is restored to the files of the A.O. The A.O. is directed to examine the facts of this case and the dictum laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court and take a decision in accordance with law. It is ordered accordingly.
More judgments on Section 40(a)(i)
- M/S American Express Bank Ltd., Mumbai vs The Jt DIT (It)1(1), MumbaiITA 9414/MUM/2004[2000-2001]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2000-2001
- DDIT(It)- 1(1), Mumbai vs M/S. American Express Bank Ltd., MumbaiITA 5667/MUM/2004[2000-01]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2000-01
- Eurofins Peenya Resources Private Limited… vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 1116/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2016-17
- Azure Green Tech Private Limited, Delhi vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle…ITA 6199/DEL/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed21 Sept 2026AY 2021-22
- Azure Green Tech Private Limited, Delhi vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle…ITA 6198/DEL/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed21 Sept 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. V J Petro Products vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St) - IiiAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Asian Aura vs. Government Of Nct Of Delhi And Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Shining Steel Through Its Proprietor Kartik Gupta vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Redamancy World Through Its Proprietor Sanjay Kumar Goel vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Arj Exim INDIA vs. Additional Commissioner Of CGST, Appeals-Ii, New Delhi And OrsDelhi · 27 Oct 2026