THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOMT AX vs. SAHARA AIRLINES LTD.
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court held that no substantial question of law arose from the ITAT's decision. The ITAT had accepted the assessee's plea that the payments were not royalty and no TDS was deductible.
What were the facts?
The assessee airline made payments to foreign companies for using reservation software. The Assessing Officer treated these payments as royalty and sought tax deduction. The assessee argued the services were rendered outside India and income accrued offshore.
What were the issues?
Whether payments made for reservation software to foreign companies constitute royalty and are subject to TDS under Section 195 of the Income Tax Act.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
## IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
ITA No. 1176/2009 & CM No. 16086/2009 ITA No. 1177/2009 & CM No. 16088/2009 ITA No. 1178/2009 & CM No. 16090/2009 ITA No. 1179/2009 & CM No. 16092/2009 ITA No. 1180/2009 & CM No. 16094/2009 ITA No. 1181/2009 & CM No. 16096/2009 ITA No. 1182/2009 & CM No. 16098/2009 ITA No. 1183/2009 & CM No. 16100/2009 ITA No. 1184/2009 & CM No. 16102/2009 ITA No. 1185/2009 & CM No. 16104/2009 ITA No. 1186/2009 & CM No. 16105/2009 ITA No. 1190/2009 & CM No. 16112/2009 ITA No. 1191/2009 & CM No. 16114/2009 ITA No. 1192/2009 & CM No. 16116/2009 ITA No. 1193/2009 & CM No. 16118/2009 ITA No. 1194/2009 & CM No. 16120/2009 ITA No. 1195/2009 & CM No. 16122/2009 ITA No. 1196/2009 & CM No. 16124/2009 ITA No. 1197/2009 & CM No. 16126/2009 ITA No. 1198/2009 & CM No. 16128/2009 ITA No. 1199/2009 & CM No. 16130/2009
Decided on: December 21, 2009
Commissioner of Income Tax
. . . Appellant
through:
Ms. Rashmi Chopra, Advocate
**VERSUS**
Sahara Airlines Ltd.
. . . Respondent
through:
Mr. Percy Pardiwala, Sr. Adv.
with Mr. U.A. Rana,
Ms. Anuradha Sharma and Ms. Priyanka Dayal, Advocates
**CORAM:-**
%
\*
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI THE HON'BLE MR. J
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 195
- Subramanian Aravind, Tuticorin vs Ward 1, TuticorinITA 297/CHNY/2026[2018-2019]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2018-2019
- Gmp Technical Solutions Private Limited… vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, MumbaiITA 6155/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed21 Sept 2026AY 2014-15
- M/S. Sarjak Container Lines Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs DCIT, Circle 3(1)(1), MumbaiITA 1791/MUM/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed16 Sept 2026AY 2022-23
- Universal Tractor Holding Llc, Usa vs DCIT, International Taxation Circle…ITA 2216/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: Disposed15 Sept 2026AY 2019-20
- Buttercup Publishing Private Limited, Delhi vs ITO Int Tax. 1(1)(2), DelhiITITA 19/DEL/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed7 Sept 2026AY 2019-20
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sh Umang Uniyal vs. Commissioner Department Of Central Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 16 Oct 2026
- Paresh Textiles Prop Paresh Gudhka vs. Superintendent Range Iv Div VBombay · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Palladium Constructions PVT LTD. vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central TaxKarnataka · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Vk Construction vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - IiMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Sri Bhuvaneshwari And Co vs. The Deputy Commissioner (St)Madras · 15 Oct 2026