DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. SHIN SATELLITE PUBLIC CO LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA - 53 / 2012HC Delhi31 January 20123 pages
For Petitioner: SANJEEV SABHARWAL
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The Delhi High Court held that the payments received by the assessee could not be taxed as royalty under Explanation to Section 9(1)(vi) of the Act. Therefore, no substantial question of law arose for consideration.

What were the facts?

The appeals involved identical facts to a previous case, Asia Satellite Telecommunication Co. Ltd., where the Delhi High Court had set aside a Tribunal's decision. The Revenue had appealed against the Tribunal's order concerning the taxability of payments received by the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether payments received by the assessee for satellite services constitute royalty under Section 9(1)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 9(1)(vi),Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

![](_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg)

\$~1 to 7

\* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ ITA 52/2012, ITA 53/2012, ITA 54/2012, ITA 58/2012, ITA 59/2012, ITA 60/2012 & ITA 61/2012

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX ..... Appellant

Through: Ms.Rashmi Chopra, Advocate for

Mr.Sanjeev Sabharwal, Sr.Standing Cousel.

versus

SHIN SATELLITE PUBLIC CO LTD ..... Respondent Through: None.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

ORDER 31.01.2012

C.M.No.1300/2012 in ITA 52/2012, C.M.No.1301/2012 in ITA 54/2012, C.M.No.1305/2012 in ITA 58/2012, C.M.No.1306/2012 in ITA 59/2012, C.M.No.1307/2012 in ITA 60/2012, C.M.No.1308/2012 in ITA 61/2012

Exemption allowed subject to all just exception.

Applications stand disposed of.

ITA 52/2012, ITA 53/2012, ITA 54/2012, ITA 58/2012, ITA 59/2012, ITA 60/2012 & ITA 61/2012

1.

The present appeal u/s 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961

2012:DHC:10248-DB

4.

The decision of the Tribunal in the case of Asia SatTelecommunication Co. Ltd.(supra) has been set aside and reversed by the Delhi High Court vide decision dated 31.01.2011 in ITA Nos. 131 and 134/2003. It has been held that the payment received by the assessee cannot be taxed and treated as royalty under explanation to Section 9(1)(vi) of the Act.

- 5. It is not disputed before us and it was not disputed before the Tribunal that the facts of the present case are identical to the factual position in Asia Satellite Telecommunication Co. Ltd.(supra). - 6. In view of the aforesaid decision, the present appeals are dismissed, as we hold that no substantial question of law arises for consideration as the issue has been decided against the Revenue

7.

No costs.

SANJIV KHANNA, J

R.V.EÄSWAR. J

JANUARY 31, 2012 mr

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 →