ORACLE SYSTEMS CORPORATION,NEW DELHI vs. ADIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 1834/DEL/2009Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 January 2026AY 2002-03Bench: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY (Judicial Member), SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that revenue transfers from global deals did not constitute royalty as no software duplication occurred in India under those agreements. It also noted that taxing such revenue as royalty would lead to double taxation.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Oracle Systems Corporation, a US company, had a wholly owned subsidiary in India, OIPL. The dispute involved taxation of royalty on software distribution and support services, and the existence of a Permanent Establishment (PE) in India.

What were the issues?

The key issues were whether revenue transfers from global deals constituted royalty under Indian tax law and the DTAA, and whether OIPL constituted a Permanent Establishment of the assessee in India.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 9(1)(vi),Section 234B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(8)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, DELHI ‘D’ BENCH,

Before: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY & SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA

For Appellant: Shri G.C. Srivastava, Adv, Shri AtishayJain, Adv, Shri Kalrav Mehrotra, Adv, Shri O.P. Mehra, Sr. Consultant, Shri Naveen Dhamija, CA
For Respondent: Shri Indruj Sngh Rai, Spl. Counsel, Shri Sanjeev Menon, JSC, Shri Gaurav Kumar, Adv
Hearing: 13.10.2025Pronounced: 02.01.2025

Heard together (5 matters)

ITA No. 1833/DEL/2009
ITA No. 1834/DEL/2009
ITA No. 1835/DEL/2009
ITA No. 1836/DEL/2009
ITA No. 3313/DEL/2013

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

PER NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

-

The above captioned bunch of 5 separate appeals by the assessee are preferred against the order of the ld. CIT(A)-XXIX, New Delhi dated 20.01.2009 pertaini

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 9(1)(vi)

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →