What is Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co. Ltd. v. DIT authority for?

Payments for the use of equipment, such as satellite transponders, do not constitute 'royalty' under Section 9(1)(vi) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, or under applicable tax treaties, especially when there is no transfer of the right to use a process or underlying technology.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co. Ltd. v. DIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 9(1)(vi), Section 195, Section 248, Section 254, Section 1961, Section 90(2).

Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co. Ltd. v. DIT (332 ITR 340)

Q: How many judgments cite Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co. Ltd. v. DIT?

359 judgments on BharatTax cite Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co. Ltd. v. DIT (332 ITR 340), spanning 2011 to 2026.

M/S. Telecom Italia Sparkle Singapore Pte. Limited, Singapore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation- Circle 2(1), Bangalore

In the result, all the three appeals filed by assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 579/BANG/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Aug 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(It)A Nos. 579 & 580/Bang/2020 Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2010-11 M/S. Telecom Italia The Deputy Sparkle Singapore Pte. Commissioner Of Ltd., Income Tax, 23-01, Suntec Tower (International Four, Taxation), 6 Temasek Boulevard, Vs. Circle – 2(1), Singapore – 038986 Bangalore. Pan: Aagct6780P Appellant Respondent & It(It)A No. 1138/Bang/2022 Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Ti Sparkle The Deputy Singapore Pte. Ltd., Commissioner Of 23-01, Suntec Tower Income Tax, Four, (International 6 Temasek Boulevard, Taxation), Singapore – 038986 Circle – 2(2), Vs. Pan: Aagct6780P Bangalore. Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Nischal .B, Addl. CIT (DR)

Section 148Section 195Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vi)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(IT)A Nos. 579 & 580/Bang/2020 Assessment Years : 2009-10 to 2010-11 M/s. Telecom Italia The Deputy Sparkle Singapore Pte. Commissioner of Ltd., Income Tax, 23-01, Suntec Tower (International Four, Taxation), 6 Temasek Boulevard, Vs. Circle – 2(1), Singapore – 038986 Bangalore. PAN: AAGCT6780P APPELLANT RESPONDENT & IT(IT)A No. 1138/Bang/2022 Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/s. TI Sparkle The Deputy Singapore Pte. Ltd., Commissioner of 23-01, Suntec Tower Income Tax, Four,…

Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation)-2 vs. Intelsat Us Llc

ITA - 455 / 2023HC Delhi17 Aug 2023

…ar, learned senior standing counsel, who appears on behalf of the appellant/revenue, that the issue raised in the present appeal is covered by the decisions rendered by the coordinate benches in M/s Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co. Ltd. v. DIT (2011) 322 ITR 340 (Del) and Director of International Taxation v. New Skies Satellite BV (2016) 382 ITR 114 (Del). 9. We are told that the appellant/revenue has preferred Special Leave Petition(s) against the said decisions, which are pending adjudication. 10. Accordingly, the appeal of the appellant/revenue is closed, following the abovementioned decisions…

Telefonica De Espana Sa, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation), Circle-2(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee stands partly allowed as indicated hereinabove

ITA 180/BANG/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(It)A Nos. 2657/Bang/2019, 180/Bang/2021 & 817/Bang/2022 Assessment Years : 2010-11 To 2012-13 M/S. Telefonica Depreciation Espana Sa, C/O. Bsr & Co.Llp, 3Rd Floor, Pebble The Acit(It)/Dcit(It), Beach, Circle – 2(2), Embassy Golf Links Bangalore. Business Park, Vs. Off Intermediate Ring Road, Bangalore – 560 071. Pan: Aahct0411G Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sharath Rao, Ca Revenue By : Shri D.K. Mishra, Cit Dr

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, CIT DR

Section 147Section 148Section 201Section 234ASection 9(1)(vi)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(IT)A Nos. 2657/Bang/2019, 180/Bang/2021 & 817/Bang/2022 Assessment Years : 2010-11 to 2012-13 M/s. Telefonica Depreciation Espana SA, C/o. BSR & Co.LLP, 3rd Floor, Pebble The ACIT(IT)/DCIT(IT), Beach, Circle – 2(2), Embassy Golf Links Bangalore. Business Park, Vs. Off Intermediate Ring Road, Bangalore – 560 071. PAN: AAHCT0411G APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Sharath Rao, CA Revenue by : Shri D.K. Mishra, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 25-07-2023 Date of Pronouncem…

M/S. Telefonica De Espana Sa, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, (International Taxation), Circle- 2(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee stands partly allowed as indicated hereinabove

ITA 2657/BANG/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(It)A Nos. 2657/Bang/2019, 180/Bang/2021 & 817/Bang/2022 Assessment Years : 2010-11 To 2012-13 M/S. Telefonica Depreciation Espana Sa, C/O. Bsr & Co.Llp, 3Rd Floor, Pebble The Acit(It)/Dcit(It), Beach, Circle – 2(2), Embassy Golf Links Bangalore. Business Park, Vs. Off Intermediate Ring Road, Bangalore – 560 071. Pan: Aahct0411G Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sharath Rao, Ca Revenue By : Shri D.K. Mishra, Cit Dr

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, CIT DR

Section 147Section 148Section 201Section 234ASection 9(1)(vi)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(IT)A Nos. 2657/Bang/2019, 180/Bang/2021 & 817/Bang/2022 Assessment Years : 2010-11 to 2012-13 M/s. Telefonica Depreciation Espana SA, C/o. BSR & Co.LLP, 3rd Floor, Pebble The ACIT(IT)/DCIT(IT), Beach, Circle – 2(2), Embassy Golf Links Bangalore. Business Park, Vs. Off Intermediate Ring Road, Bangalore – 560 071. PAN: AAHCT0411G APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Sharath Rao, CA Revenue by : Shri D.K. Mishra, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 25-07-2023 Date of Pronouncem…

Amazon Web Services, Inc., Usa vs. ACIT Circle International Tax 1(1)(1), New Delhi

Accordingly, ground No. 3 along with its sub-grounds 3.1 to 3.4, ground No. 4 and ground No. 5 along with its sub-ground 5.1 r.w ground No. 2 are allowed

ITA 523/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: FixedITAT Delhi01 Aug 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR

Section 144CSection 147Section 151Section 201Section 9(1)(vi)

…nd distinguishable on facts as explained hereunder: Re: Asia Satellite Communications DCIT: 85 ITD 478 Del @ para 12 of the submission) The aforesaid decision has since been reversed by the Delhi High Court in Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co. Ltd. v. DIT 332 ITR 340 (Del), wherein the Court held that receipts earned from providing data transmission services through satellites do not constitute royalty within the meaning of section 9(1)(vi) of the Act. Re: Cargo Community Network (P) Ltd.: 289 ITR 355 (AAR) para 12 of the submission) It is at the outset submitted that the aforesaid decision was rendered by Au…

Amazon Web Services, Inc., Usa vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1)(1), New Delhi

Accordingly, ground No. 3 along with its sub-grounds 3.1 to 3.4, ground No. 4 and ground No. 5 along with its sub-ground 5.1 r.w ground No. 2 are allowed

ITA 522/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: FixedITAT Delhi01 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR

Section 144CSection 147Section 151Section 201Section 9(1)(vi)

…nd distinguishable on facts as explained hereunder: Re: Asia Satellite Communications DCIT: 85 ITD 478 Del @ para 12 of the submission) The aforesaid decision has since been reversed by the Delhi High Court in Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co. Ltd. v. DIT 332 ITR 340 (Del), wherein the Court held that receipts earned from providing data transmission services through satellites do not constitute royalty within the meaning of section 9(1)(vi) of the Act. Re: Cargo Community Network (P) Ltd.: 289 ITR 355 (AAR) para 12 of the submission) It is at the outset submitted that the aforesaid decision was rendered by Au…

Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation)-2 vs. Intelsat Us Llc (Erstwhile Intelsat Corporation)

ITA - 395 / 2023HC Delhi24 Jul 2023

…ar, learned senior standing counsel, who appears on behalf of the appellant/revenue, that the issue raised in the present appeal is covered by the decisions rendered by the coordinate benches in M/s Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co. Ltd. v. DIT (2011) 322 ITR 340 (Del) and Director of International Taxation v. New Skies Satellite BV (2016) 382 ITR 114 (Del). 9. We are told that the appellant/revenue has preferred Special Leave Petition(s) against the said decisions, which are pending adjudication. 10. Accordingly, the appeal of the appellant/revenue is closed, following the abovementioned decision…

Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation)-2 vs. Intelsat Us Llc (Erstwhile Intelsat Corporation)

ITA - 394 / 2023HC Delhi24 Jul 2023

…8. We are told by Mr Sanjay Kumar, who appears on behalf of the appellant/revenue, that the issue raised in the present appeal is covered by the decisions rendered by the coordinate benches in M/s Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co. Ltd. v. DIT (2011) 322 ITR 340 (Del) and Director of International Taxation v. New Skies Satellite BV (2016) 382 ITR 114 (Del). 9. We are told that the appellant/revenue has preferred Special Leave Petition(s) against the said decisions, which are pending adjudication. 10. Accordingly, the appeal of the appellant/revenue is closed, following the abovementioned decisio…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, (Central)-I, Raipur vs. Mesers Chhattisgarh Steel & Power Limited, Raipur

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 92/RPR/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur18 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.91 & 92/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Chhattisgarh Steel & Power Limited. 142, Sahid Smarak, G.E Road, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aaccc7479G ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Puja Bajaj, CAFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40

…ent and the use of equipment by its customer. This was done in the case of Lakshmi Audio Visual Inc. vs. Asstt. Commr. of Commercial Taxes (124 STC 426), which has been followed by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Asia Satellite Telecommunications Ltd (332 ITR 340), in the following terms: "9. Thus if the transaction is one of leasing/hiring/letting simpliciter under which the possession of the goods, i.e., effective and general control of the goods is to be given to the customer and the customer has the freedom and choice of selecting the manner, time and nature of use and enjoyment , though within the fr…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-I, Raipur vs. Mesers Chhattisgarh Steel & Power Limited, Raipur

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 91/RPR/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur18 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.91 & 92/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Chhattisgarh Steel & Power Limited. 142, Sahid Smarak, G.E Road, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aaccc7479G ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Puja Bajaj, CAFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40

…ent and the use of equipment by its customer. This was done in the case of Lakshmi Audio Visual Inc. vs. Asstt. Commr. of Commercial Taxes (124 STC 426), which has been followed by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Asia Satellite Telecommunications Ltd (332 ITR 340), in the following terms: "9. Thus if the transaction is one of leasing/hiring/letting simpliciter under which the possession of the goods, i.e., effective and general control of the goods is to be given to the customer and the customer has the freedom and choice of selecting the manner, time and nature of use and enjoyment , though within the fr…

Planetcast International Pte.Ltd, Singapure vs. ACIT, Circle1(1)(1) International Taxation, Delhi

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1832/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jul 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Sh. Vizaya Vasanta, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 9(1)(vi)

…tion 9(1) of the Act were not merely clarificatory in nature. Respectfully agreeing with the said decisions of the Delhi High Court, this question is not considered” 32. The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co. Ltd 332 ITR 340 had the occasion to consider a similar grievance and held as under: “It is clear from the reading of section 5(2) that a non-resident is liable to pay tax on the income derived by him, which is received or deemed to be received in India or which accrues or arises or is deemed to accrue or arise in India during the relevant year. Thus, a non-resid…

Smit Singapore Pte Ltd, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax(Int Taxation)-4(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 816/MUM/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jun 2023AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal a/w Ms. Miti ShahFor Respondent: Shri Chandip Singh

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 234Section 234ASection 234BSection 270ASection 44BSection 9(1)(vi)

…aty, and thus, the same as per Sec. 90(2) could not be brought to tax under the Act. Before proceeding any further, we may herein observe, that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co. Ltd. Vs. DIT (2011) 332 ITR 340 (Del), the effect of a tax treaty made pursuant to Sec. 90 is that if no tax liability is imposed under the Act, the question of resorting to the tax treaty would not arise. Further, no provision of the tax treaty can fasten a tax liability when the liability is not imposed by the Act. But then, if a tax liability is imposed by the Act, the agree…

Aptean India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 422/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No. 422/Bang/2022 Assessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Aptean India Pvt. Ltd., 1/2, 8Th Floor, Level 5, The Assistant Golden Heights, Commissioner Of 59Th C Cross Road, Income Tax, 4Th M Block, Circle – 1(1)(1), Rajajinagar, Vs. Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 010. Pan: Aaacc5890M Appellant Respondent : Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar, Assessee By Advocate : Shri Praveen Karanth, Cit- Revenue By Dr Date Of Hearing : 03-11-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 20-01-2023 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Final Assessment Order Dated 25/03/2022 Passed By Nfac, Delhi For A.Y. 2017-18 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “The Grounds Mentioned Herein By The Appellant Are Without Prejudice To One Another General Ground 1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Final Assessment Order Passed By National Faceless

For Respondent: Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar

Section 143(3)Section 92D

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(TP)A No. 422/Bang/2022 Assessment Year : 2017-18 M/s. Aptean India Pvt. Ltd., 1/2, 8th Floor, Level 5, The Assistant Golden Heights, Commissioner of 59th C Cross Road, Income Tax, 4th M Block, Circle – 1(1)(1), Rajajinagar, Vs. Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 010. PAN: AAACC5890M APPELLANT RESPONDENT : Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar, Assessee by Advocate : Shri Praveen Karanth, CIT- Revenue by DR Date of Hearing : 03-11-2022 Date of Pronouncement : 20-01-2023 ORDER PER BEENA PILLA…

ACIT, International Taxation, Circle 3(1)(2), New Delhi vs. Sabre Decision Technologies International Llc, Usa

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 7354/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Tarandeep Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Gangadhar Panda, CIT-DR

Section 234ASection 44DSection 9Section 9(1)(vi)

…which are stated to be in his favor on the issue of what constitutes royalty. Each of the judgments is distinguished from the assessee’s case, on the basis of the nature of business of the assessee and how it operates. • In Asia Satellite Telecommunication (332 ITR 340), the Delhi High Court laid down the principle that payment was not for the use of any process or equipment, since control over the process or equipment was with Asia Satellite Telecommunications and not with the Customers/Argument was addressed on the meaning which is assigned to the term "royalty" occurring in sub-clause (vi) of Explanation 2.…

Sabre Decision Technologies International Llc, New Delhi vs. ACIT, International Taxation, Circle 3(1)(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5782/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Tarandeep Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Gangadhar Panda, CIT-DR

Section 234ASection 44DSection 9Section 9(1)(vi)

…which are stated to be in his favor on the issue of what constitutes royalty. Each of the judgments is distinguished from the assessee’s case, on the basis of the nature of business of the assessee and how it operates. • In Asia Satellite Telecommunication (332 ITR 340), the Delhi High Court laid down the principle that payment was not for the use of any process or equipment, since control over the process or equipment was with Asia Satellite Telecommunications and not with the Customers/Argument was addressed on the meaning which is assigned to the term "royalty" occurring in sub-clause (vi) of Explanation 2.…