COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-1 vs. COMPTEL OYJ

1 $-4 to 6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 898/2016, CM APPL. 46316/201^6 (Delay of 90 days in filing) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-!' . .....Appellant Through: Mr. Rahul Chaudhary, Adv. Versus COMPTELOYJ Respondent Through: Mr. Prakash Kumar, Ms. Rashmi Sinha and , Mehvish Khan, Advs. + ITA 899/2016, CM APPL. 46317/2016 (Delay of 90 days in filing), CM APPL. 46318/2016 (Exemption) ^ COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATION TAXATION)- 1 ' ....^Appellant Through: Mr. Rahul Chaudhary, Adv. Versus , ' ' COMPTELOYJ / .....Respondent Through: Mr. Prakash Kuiriar, Ms.,Rashmi Sinha and Mehvish Khan, Advs. + ITA 900/2016, CM APPL. 46319/2016 (Delay of 90 days in filing), CM APPL. 46320/2016 (Exemption) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATION TAXATION)- 1 , ..... Appellant ; Through: Mr. Rahul Chaudhary,-Adv. ' I " Versus I ' I ' ' I . I . ; I COMPTELOYJ , Respondent , ' Through: Mr. Prakash Kumar, Ms. Rashmi Sinha and Mehvish Khan, Advs. ^ CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMIWAZIRI ORDER % 19.12.2016 CM APPL. 46316/2016 (Delav of 90 davs in filingVin ITA 898/2016 CM APPL. 46317/2016 (Delay of 90 days in filing! in ITA 899/2016 CM APPL. 46319/2016 CDelav of 90 days in filing) in ITA 900/2016 Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Signature Not Verified

For the reasons mentioned in the applications, the applications are allowed. CM APPL. 46318/2016 (Exemption) in ITA 899/2016 CM APPL. 46320/2016 (Exemption) in ITA 900/2016 X Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. ITA 898/2016, ITA 899/2016 & ITA 900/2016 The questions which the Revenue seeks to urge in these appeals under Section 260A of the Incpnie Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') are common, i.e., whether the amounts paid by the assessee to its licensors, amounted to royalty within the meaning of the expression under Section 9(l)(vi) and Article 12 of the Indo-Finland Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA). The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) followed the previous judgments of this Court including the judgment in DIT V. Infrasoft Ltd. 264 CTR 329 and also the judgment - DIT (International Taxation) vs. Nokia Networks OY 25 Taxman.com 255 (Delhi). The later decision had an occasion to interpret the same provision in the context of the very.same treaty. Since the ITAT has followed the previous binding judgments of this Court, the present appeals do not raise a substantial question of law. The Court is also satisfied that the application of law by the ITAT was sound and proper. The appeals are therefore dismissed. S. RAVIl^RA BHAT, J NAJMIWAZIRI, J DECEMBER 19,2016/acm