ORACLE SYSTEMS CORPORATION,NEW DELHI vs. ADIT, NEW DELHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that revenue transfers from global deals to OIPL did not constitute royalty taxable in India as no software duplication occurred. It also noted that taxing such revenue in the hands of the assessee 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 from global deals constituted royalty and whether OIPL constituted a Permanent Establishment of the assessee in India.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(8)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 citing125 Taxmann.com 42 · 2021 · SC · Read judgment
- DIT v. Morgan Stanley & Co.360 citing292 ITR 416 · 2007 · SC · Read judgment
- DIT v. Morgan Stanley Co. Inc.162 citing399 ITR 34 · 2017 · SC
- DIT v. Mitshubishi Corporation70 citing130 Taxmann.com 276 · 2021 · SC
- Adobe Systems Inc. v. ADIT59 citing292 CTR 407 · 2011 · HC
- Formula One World Championship Ltd. v. CIT (International Taxation)16 citing80 Taxmann.com 347 · 2017 · SC
- Progress Rail Locomotive Inc. v. DCIT8 citing466 ITR 76 · 2024 · HC
- 176 Taxmann.com 7836 citing176 Taxmann.com 783 · 2025 · SC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI ‘D’ BENCH,
Before: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY & SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA
Heard together (5 matters)
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.
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)
- Ahaguru Education Technology Private… vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 1993/CHNY/2026[2023-24]Status: Disposed23 Sept 2026AY 2023-24
- Slack Technologies Limited, Mumbai vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 979/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: Disposed15 Sept 2026AY 2022-23
- Slack Technologies Limited, Mumbai vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 4310/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: Disposed15 Sept 2026AY 2021-22
- Atos Information Technology (Singapore) Pte… vs DCIT, (Internation Taxation) Circle…ITA 6745/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed7 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
- Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs Times Content Limited( Now Known As Times…ITA 5333/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: Disposed3 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages PVT. LTD. vs. The Commissioner, CGST And Cx, Dibrugarh And AnrGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Shree Sushruta Health Services Private Limited vs. The Union Of INDIAPatna · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Rst Batteries vs. Deputy Commissioner CGST Delhi West & Ors.Delhi · 14 Oct 2026
- Dr.Sunil Kumar Padhi vs. The Chief Commissioner, GST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- N.K Fashion Through It Proprietor Mr. Narender Agarwal vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Central Goods And Service Tax, Delhi EastDelhi · 14 Oct 2026