CIT v. HEG Ltd.

263 ITR 230High Court2003#1474 most cited

What is CIT v. HEG Ltd. authority for?

Payments made for mere information, not involving the imparting of secret, confidential, or specialized technical, industrial, commercial, or scientific knowledge, experience, or skill, do not qualify as 'royalty' under Section 9(1)(vi) of the Income Tax Act or relevant DTAA articles. Not every piece of commercial information constitutes royalty; expertise or skill in providing it is required.

77

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. HEG Ltd. · section 9(1)(vi) · section 195 · royalty income · definition of royalty · information as royalty · tax treaty · withholding tax · DTAA royalty · expertise or skill · commercial information

Sections most often in play

Section 195Section 143(3)Section 13(3)Section 195(2)Section 9(1)(vi)Section 195(1)Section 11(3)(a)Section 12

Issues it is cited on

copyrighted articlesection 195(2)royalty incomewithholding taxsection 9(1)(vi)computer softwaretax treatysection 195section 9(1)dependent agent pefixed place pedouble taxation

Judgments citing CIT v. HEG Ltd.

Deloitte Haskins & Sells LLP, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It)-2(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 4802/MUM/2019[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Amit Shuklaita Nos.201 To 233/Mum/2021, : A.Ys : 2018-19 & 4800 To 4804/Mum/2019 & 2019-20 4810 To 4814/Mum/2019 Deloitte Haskins & Sells Llp Vs. Deputy Commissioner One International Center, Of Income Tax, (It) - Tower 3, 27Th - 32Nd Floor, 2(1)(2) Senapati Bapat Marg, Mumbai 400021 Elphinstone Road, (W) Mumbai 400013 [Pan: Aacfd4815A] Ita Nos. 4744, 4775 To : A.Y : 2018-19 4782/Mum/2019 Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Vs. Deputy Commissioner India Llp, Of Income Tax, (It) - Indiabulls Finance Centre 2(1)(2) Tower 3, 27Th-32Nd Floor, Mumbai 400021 Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Road, (W) Mumbai 400013 [Pan: Aalfd7157J]

For Appellant: Shri P.J PardiwalaFor Respondent: Shri Milind Chavan
Section 195

…ill as contemplated in the definition of royalty as contained in clause (iv) of Explanation 2 to section 9(1)(vi) or under article 11(3)(a) of the India-UK tax treaty. In support of his contention, he relied upon the following decisions : “a. CIT vs. HEG Ltd. 263 ITR 230 (MP) In this case, the assessee had paid certain amounts to a USA company for purchase of some information. The transaction was held by the AO to involve imparting of information concerning technical, industrial, commercial or scientific knowledge, experience or skill and, therefore, the payment was held to be royalty. The Tribunal held that ther…

Deloitte Haskins & Sells LLP, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It)-2(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 4801/MUM/2019[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Amit Shuklaita Nos.201 To 233/Mum/2021, : A.Ys : 2018-19 & 4800 To 4804/Mum/2019 & 2019-20 4810 To 4814/Mum/2019 Deloitte Haskins & Sells Llp Vs. Deputy Commissioner One International Center, Of Income Tax, (It) - Tower 3, 27Th - 32Nd Floor, 2(1)(2) Senapati Bapat Marg, Mumbai 400021 Elphinstone Road, (W) Mumbai 400013 [Pan: Aacfd4815A] Ita Nos. 4744, 4775 To : A.Y : 2018-19 4782/Mum/2019 Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Vs. Deputy Commissioner India Llp, Of Income Tax, (It) - Indiabulls Finance Centre 2(1)(2) Tower 3, 27Th-32Nd Floor, Mumbai 400021 Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Road, (W) Mumbai 400013 [Pan: Aalfd7157J]

For Appellant: Shri P.J PardiwalaFor Respondent: Shri Milind Chavan
Section 195

…ill as contemplated in the definition of royalty as contained in clause (iv) of Explanation 2 to section 9(1)(vi) or under article 11(3)(a) of the India-UK tax treaty. In support of his contention, he relied upon the following decisions : “a. CIT vs. HEG Ltd. 263 ITR 230 (MP) In this case, the assessee had paid certain amounts to a USA company for purchase of some information. The transaction was held by the AO to involve imparting of information concerning technical, industrial, commercial or scientific knowledge, experience or skill and, therefore, the payment was held to be royalty. The Tribunal held that ther…

Deloitte Haskins & Sells LLP, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It)-2(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 4800/MUM/2019[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Amit Shuklaita Nos.201 To 233/Mum/2021, : A.Ys : 2018-19 & 4800 To 4804/Mum/2019 & 2019-20 4810 To 4814/Mum/2019 Deloitte Haskins & Sells Llp Vs. Deputy Commissioner One International Center, Of Income Tax, (It) - Tower 3, 27Th - 32Nd Floor, 2(1)(2) Senapati Bapat Marg, Mumbai 400021 Elphinstone Road, (W) Mumbai 400013 [Pan: Aacfd4815A] Ita Nos. 4744, 4775 To : A.Y : 2018-19 4782/Mum/2019 Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Vs. Deputy Commissioner India Llp, Of Income Tax, (It) - Indiabulls Finance Centre 2(1)(2) Tower 3, 27Th-32Nd Floor, Mumbai 400021 Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Road, (W) Mumbai 400013 [Pan: Aalfd7157J]

For Appellant: Shri P.J PardiwalaFor Respondent: Shri Milind Chavan
Section 195

…ill as contemplated in the definition of royalty as contained in clause (iv) of Explanation 2 to section 9(1)(vi) or under article 11(3)(a) of the India-UK tax treaty. In support of his contention, he relied upon the following decisions : “a. CIT vs. HEG Ltd. 263 ITR 230 (MP) In this case, the assessee had paid certain amounts to a USA company for purchase of some information. The transaction was held by the AO to involve imparting of information concerning technical, industrial, commercial or scientific knowledge, experience or skill and, therefore, the payment was held to be royalty. The Tribunal held that ther…

Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu India LLP, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 4782/MUM/2019[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Amit Shuklaita Nos.201 To 233/Mum/2021, : A.Ys : 2018-19 & 4800 To 4804/Mum/2019 & 2019-20 4810 To 4814/Mum/2019 Deloitte Haskins & Sells Llp Vs. Deputy Commissioner One International Center, Of Income Tax, (It) - Tower 3, 27Th - 32Nd Floor, 2(1)(2) Senapati Bapat Marg, Mumbai 400021 Elphinstone Road, (W) Mumbai 400013 [Pan: Aacfd4815A] Ita Nos. 4744, 4775 To : A.Y : 2018-19 4782/Mum/2019 Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Vs. Deputy Commissioner India Llp, Of Income Tax, (It) - Indiabulls Finance Centre 2(1)(2) Tower 3, 27Th-32Nd Floor, Mumbai 400021 Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Road, (W) Mumbai 400013 [Pan: Aalfd7157J]

For Appellant: Shri P.J PardiwalaFor Respondent: Shri Milind Chavan
Section 195

…ill as contemplated in the definition of royalty as contained in clause (iv) of Explanation 2 to section 9(1)(vi) or under article 11(3)(a) of the India-UK tax treaty. In support of his contention, he relied upon the following decisions : “a. CIT vs. HEG Ltd. 263 ITR 230 (MP) In this case, the assessee had paid certain amounts to a USA company for purchase of some information. The transaction was held by the AO to involve imparting of information concerning technical, industrial, commercial or scientific knowledge, experience or skill and, therefore, the payment was held to be royalty. The Tribunal held that ther…

Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu India LLP, Mumbai vs. DCIT(International Taxation)-2(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 4781/MUM/2019[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Amit Shuklaita Nos.201 To 233/Mum/2021, : A.Ys : 2018-19 & 4800 To 4804/Mum/2019 & 2019-20 4810 To 4814/Mum/2019 Deloitte Haskins & Sells Llp Vs. Deputy Commissioner One International Center, Of Income Tax, (It) - Tower 3, 27Th - 32Nd Floor, 2(1)(2) Senapati Bapat Marg, Mumbai 400021 Elphinstone Road, (W) Mumbai 400013 [Pan: Aacfd4815A] Ita Nos. 4744, 4775 To : A.Y : 2018-19 4782/Mum/2019 Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Vs. Deputy Commissioner India Llp, Of Income Tax, (It) - Indiabulls Finance Centre 2(1)(2) Tower 3, 27Th-32Nd Floor, Mumbai 400021 Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Road, (W) Mumbai 400013 [Pan: Aalfd7157J]

For Appellant: Shri P.J PardiwalaFor Respondent: Shri Milind Chavan
Section 195

…ill as contemplated in the definition of royalty as contained in clause (iv) of Explanation 2 to section 9(1)(vi) or under article 11(3)(a) of the India-UK tax treaty. In support of his contention, he relied upon the following decisions : “a. CIT vs. HEG Ltd. 263 ITR 230 (MP) In this case, the assessee had paid certain amounts to a USA company for purchase of some information. The transaction was held by the AO to involve imparting of information concerning technical, industrial, commercial or scientific knowledge, experience or skill and, therefore, the payment was held to be royalty. The Tribunal held that ther…

Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu India LLP, Mumbai vs. DCIT(International Taxation)-2(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 4780/MUM/2019[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Amit Shuklaita Nos.201 To 233/Mum/2021, : A.Ys : 2018-19 & 4800 To 4804/Mum/2019 & 2019-20 4810 To 4814/Mum/2019 Deloitte Haskins & Sells Llp Vs. Deputy Commissioner One International Center, Of Income Tax, (It) - Tower 3, 27Th - 32Nd Floor, 2(1)(2) Senapati Bapat Marg, Mumbai 400021 Elphinstone Road, (W) Mumbai 400013 [Pan: Aacfd4815A] Ita Nos. 4744, 4775 To : A.Y : 2018-19 4782/Mum/2019 Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Vs. Deputy Commissioner India Llp, Of Income Tax, (It) - Indiabulls Finance Centre 2(1)(2) Tower 3, 27Th-32Nd Floor, Mumbai 400021 Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Road, (W) Mumbai 400013 [Pan: Aalfd7157J]

For Appellant: Shri P.J PardiwalaFor Respondent: Shri Milind Chavan
Section 195

…ill as contemplated in the definition of royalty as contained in clause (iv) of Explanation 2 to section 9(1)(vi) or under article 11(3)(a) of the India-UK tax treaty. In support of his contention, he relied upon the following decisions : “a. CIT vs. HEG Ltd. 263 ITR 230 (MP) In this case, the assessee had paid certain amounts to a USA company for purchase of some information. The transaction was held by the AO to involve imparting of information concerning technical, industrial, commercial or scientific knowledge, experience or skill and, therefore, the payment was held to be royalty. The Tribunal held that ther…

Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu India LLP, Mumbai vs. DCIT(International Taxation)-2(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 4779/MUM/2019[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Amit Shuklaita Nos.201 To 233/Mum/2021, : A.Ys : 2018-19 & 4800 To 4804/Mum/2019 & 2019-20 4810 To 4814/Mum/2019 Deloitte Haskins & Sells Llp Vs. Deputy Commissioner One International Center, Of Income Tax, (It) - Tower 3, 27Th - 32Nd Floor, 2(1)(2) Senapati Bapat Marg, Mumbai 400021 Elphinstone Road, (W) Mumbai 400013 [Pan: Aacfd4815A] Ita Nos. 4744, 4775 To : A.Y : 2018-19 4782/Mum/2019 Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Vs. Deputy Commissioner India Llp, Of Income Tax, (It) - Indiabulls Finance Centre 2(1)(2) Tower 3, 27Th-32Nd Floor, Mumbai 400021 Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Road, (W) Mumbai 400013 [Pan: Aalfd7157J]

For Appellant: Shri P.J PardiwalaFor Respondent: Shri Milind Chavan
Section 195

…ill as contemplated in the definition of royalty as contained in clause (iv) of Explanation 2 to section 9(1)(vi) or under article 11(3)(a) of the India-UK tax treaty. In support of his contention, he relied upon the following decisions : “a. CIT vs. HEG Ltd. 263 ITR 230 (MP) In this case, the assessee had paid certain amounts to a USA company for purchase of some information. The transaction was held by the AO to involve imparting of information concerning technical, industrial, commercial or scientific knowledge, experience or skill and, therefore, the payment was held to be royalty. The Tribunal held that ther…

Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu India LLP, Mumbai vs. DCIT(International Taxation)-2(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 4778/MUM/2019[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Amit Shuklaita Nos.201 To 233/Mum/2021, : A.Ys : 2018-19 & 4800 To 4804/Mum/2019 & 2019-20 4810 To 4814/Mum/2019 Deloitte Haskins & Sells Llp Vs. Deputy Commissioner One International Center, Of Income Tax, (It) - Tower 3, 27Th - 32Nd Floor, 2(1)(2) Senapati Bapat Marg, Mumbai 400021 Elphinstone Road, (W) Mumbai 400013 [Pan: Aacfd4815A] Ita Nos. 4744, 4775 To : A.Y : 2018-19 4782/Mum/2019 Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Vs. Deputy Commissioner India Llp, Of Income Tax, (It) - Indiabulls Finance Centre 2(1)(2) Tower 3, 27Th-32Nd Floor, Mumbai 400021 Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Road, (W) Mumbai 400013 [Pan: Aalfd7157J]

For Appellant: Shri P.J PardiwalaFor Respondent: Shri Milind Chavan
Section 195

…ill as contemplated in the definition of royalty as contained in clause (iv) of Explanation 2 to section 9(1)(vi) or under article 11(3)(a) of the India-UK tax treaty. In support of his contention, he relied upon the following decisions : “a. CIT vs. HEG Ltd. 263 ITR 230 (MP) In this case, the assessee had paid certain amounts to a USA company for purchase of some information. The transaction was held by the AO to involve imparting of information concerning technical, industrial, commercial or scientific knowledge, experience or skill and, therefore, the payment was held to be royalty. The Tribunal held that ther…

Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu India LLP Mumbai, Mumbai vs. DCIT(International Taxation)-2(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 4777/MUM/2019[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Amit Shuklaita Nos.201 To 233/Mum/2021, : A.Ys : 2018-19 & 4800 To 4804/Mum/2019 & 2019-20 4810 To 4814/Mum/2019 Deloitte Haskins & Sells Llp Vs. Deputy Commissioner One International Center, Of Income Tax, (It) - Tower 3, 27Th - 32Nd Floor, 2(1)(2) Senapati Bapat Marg, Mumbai 400021 Elphinstone Road, (W) Mumbai 400013 [Pan: Aacfd4815A] Ita Nos. 4744, 4775 To : A.Y : 2018-19 4782/Mum/2019 Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Vs. Deputy Commissioner India Llp, Of Income Tax, (It) - Indiabulls Finance Centre 2(1)(2) Tower 3, 27Th-32Nd Floor, Mumbai 400021 Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Road, (W) Mumbai 400013 [Pan: Aalfd7157J]

For Appellant: Shri P.J PardiwalaFor Respondent: Shri Milind Chavan
Section 195

…ill as contemplated in the definition of royalty as contained in clause (iv) of Explanation 2 to section 9(1)(vi) or under article 11(3)(a) of the India-UK tax treaty. In support of his contention, he relied upon the following decisions : “a. CIT vs. HEG Ltd. 263 ITR 230 (MP) In this case, the assessee had paid certain amounts to a USA company for purchase of some information. The transaction was held by the AO to involve imparting of information concerning technical, industrial, commercial or scientific knowledge, experience or skill and, therefore, the payment was held to be royalty. The Tribunal held that ther…

Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu India LLP, Mumbai vs. DCIT(International Taxation)-2(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 4776/MUM/2019[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Amit Shuklaita Nos.201 To 233/Mum/2021, : A.Ys : 2018-19 & 4800 To 4804/Mum/2019 & 2019-20 4810 To 4814/Mum/2019 Deloitte Haskins & Sells Llp Vs. Deputy Commissioner One International Center, Of Income Tax, (It) - Tower 3, 27Th - 32Nd Floor, 2(1)(2) Senapati Bapat Marg, Mumbai 400021 Elphinstone Road, (W) Mumbai 400013 [Pan: Aacfd4815A] Ita Nos. 4744, 4775 To : A.Y : 2018-19 4782/Mum/2019 Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Vs. Deputy Commissioner India Llp, Of Income Tax, (It) - Indiabulls Finance Centre 2(1)(2) Tower 3, 27Th-32Nd Floor, Mumbai 400021 Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Road, (W) Mumbai 400013 [Pan: Aalfd7157J]

For Appellant: Shri P.J PardiwalaFor Respondent: Shri Milind Chavan
Section 195

…ill as contemplated in the definition of royalty as contained in clause (iv) of Explanation 2 to section 9(1)(vi) or under article 11(3)(a) of the India-UK tax treaty. In support of his contention, he relied upon the following decisions : “a. CIT vs. HEG Ltd. 263 ITR 230 (MP) In this case, the assessee had paid certain amounts to a USA company for purchase of some information. The transaction was held by the AO to involve imparting of information concerning technical, industrial, commercial or scientific knowledge, experience or skill and, therefore, the payment was held to be royalty. The Tribunal held that ther…

Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu India LLP, Mumbai vs. DCIT(International Taxation)-2(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 4775/MUM/2019[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Amit Shuklaita Nos.201 To 233/Mum/2021, : A.Ys : 2018-19 & 4800 To 4804/Mum/2019 & 2019-20 4810 To 4814/Mum/2019 Deloitte Haskins & Sells Llp Vs. Deputy Commissioner One International Center, Of Income Tax, (It) - Tower 3, 27Th - 32Nd Floor, 2(1)(2) Senapati Bapat Marg, Mumbai 400021 Elphinstone Road, (W) Mumbai 400013 [Pan: Aacfd4815A] Ita Nos. 4744, 4775 To : A.Y : 2018-19 4782/Mum/2019 Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Vs. Deputy Commissioner India Llp, Of Income Tax, (It) - Indiabulls Finance Centre 2(1)(2) Tower 3, 27Th-32Nd Floor, Mumbai 400021 Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Road, (W) Mumbai 400013 [Pan: Aalfd7157J]

For Appellant: Shri P.J PardiwalaFor Respondent: Shri Milind Chavan
Section 195

…ill as contemplated in the definition of royalty as contained in clause (iv) of Explanation 2 to section 9(1)(vi) or under article 11(3)(a) of the India-UK tax treaty. In support of his contention, he relied upon the following decisions : “a. CIT vs. HEG Ltd. 263 ITR 230 (MP) In this case, the assessee had paid certain amounts to a USA company for purchase of some information. The transaction was held by the AO to involve imparting of information concerning technical, industrial, commercial or scientific knowledge, experience or skill and, therefore, the payment was held to be royalty. The Tribunal held that ther…

Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu India LLP, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It)-2(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 4744/MUM/2019[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Amit Shuklaita Nos.201 To 233/Mum/2021, : A.Ys : 2018-19 & 4800 To 4804/Mum/2019 & 2019-20 4810 To 4814/Mum/2019 Deloitte Haskins & Sells Llp Vs. Deputy Commissioner One International Center, Of Income Tax, (It) - Tower 3, 27Th - 32Nd Floor, 2(1)(2) Senapati Bapat Marg, Mumbai 400021 Elphinstone Road, (W) Mumbai 400013 [Pan: Aacfd4815A] Ita Nos. 4744, 4775 To : A.Y : 2018-19 4782/Mum/2019 Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Vs. Deputy Commissioner India Llp, Of Income Tax, (It) - Indiabulls Finance Centre 2(1)(2) Tower 3, 27Th-32Nd Floor, Mumbai 400021 Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Road, (W) Mumbai 400013 [Pan: Aalfd7157J]

For Appellant: Shri P.J PardiwalaFor Respondent: Shri Milind Chavan
Section 195

…ill as contemplated in the definition of royalty as contained in clause (iv) of Explanation 2 to section 9(1)(vi) or under article 11(3)(a) of the India-UK tax treaty. In support of his contention, he relied upon the following decisions : “a. CIT vs. HEG Ltd. 263 ITR 230 (MP) In this case, the assessee had paid certain amounts to a USA company for purchase of some information. The transaction was held by the AO to involve imparting of information concerning technical, industrial, commercial or scientific knowledge, experience or skill and, therefore, the payment was held to be royalty. The Tribunal held that ther…

American Chemical Society, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation)-1(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed, as above

ITA 6811/MUM/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ravish Sood: A.Y : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Ajay VohraFor Respondent: Shri Samuel Darse &
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 234ASection 9(1)(vi)

…he characterization of instant income, the assessee majorly relied on following judgments : i. Dun & Bradstreet Espana, S.A., In re [2005] 142 Taxman 284/272 ITR 99 (AAR) ii. DIT vs. Dun & Bradstreet [2011] 338 ITR 95 (Bom HC) iii. CIT vs. HEG Limited [2003] 263 ITR 230 (MP HC) iv. ITO vs. Cadila Healthcare [2017] 162 ITD 575 (Ahd ITAT) 6. On the other hand, the Ld. Departmental Representative for the Revenue has merely reiterated the stand of the lower authorities which is to the effect that the income earned from subscription fees for CAS division be treated as consideration for information concerning industr…

Tnt Express Worldwide (Uk) Limited, U.K vs. DDIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6/BANG/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Apr 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Vijay Pal Rao

For Appellant: Shri Chavali S. Narayan, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.R. Reddy, CIT-I(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 9(1)(vi)

…ing the management and administrative efficiency of TNT India. Therefore, the services provided by the assessee do not fall under the realm of royalty. Ld. AR has referred to the judgment of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT v. HEG Ltd., 263 ITR 230 (MP) and submitted that the Hon’ble High Court has held that every information would not have the status of royalty. Solely because of an entry of commercial nature would not make it royalty. Therefore, the Hon’ble Court has observed that every information if it concerns industrial or commercial venture, would not be a royalty. 9. The ld. AR…

DCIT vs. M/S Syndicate Bank

In the result, the revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1700/BANG/2013[1990-91]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jun 2015AY 1990-91

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Abraham P George

For Appellant: Shri Farhat Hussain Qureshi, CIT(DR)For Respondent: Smt. Lalitha Rameswaran
Section 115J

…s refer to the principle of compensation when money, which is due and payable and refundable, is not paid. 13. Madhya Pradesh High Court had the occasion to deal with the similar issue in their decision in Commissioner of Income Tax versus HEG Limited, (2009) 310 ITR 341 (MP). The facts of the said case may be noticed. The assessee became entitled to refund along with interest under Section 244A. Referring to Section 240 of the Act, the High Court observed that the term used was “refund of any amount becomes due to the assessee”. The same words were also used in Section 244A. Reference was made to the decision of…

India Trade Promotion Org

The appeals are disposed of

ITA/168/2012HC Delhi06 Sept 2013

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

Section 244ASection 260A

…to the principle of compensation when money, which is due and payable and refundable, is not paid. 13. Madhya Pradesh High Court had the occasion to deal with the similar issue in their decision in Commissioner of Income Tax versus HEG Limited, [2009] 310 ITR 341 (MP). The facts of the said case may be noticed. The assessee became entitled to refund along with interest under Section 244A. Referring to Section 240 of the Act, the High Court observed that the term used was ―refund of any amount becomes due to the assessee‖. The same words were also used in Section 244A. Reference was made to the d…

India Trade Promotion Organisation vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

The appeals are disposed of

ITA/167/2012HC Delhi06 Sept 2013
Section 244ASection 260A

…to the principle of compensation when money, which is due and payable and refundable, is not paid. 13. Madhya Pradesh High Court had the occasion to deal with the similar issue in their decision in Commissioner of Income Tax versus HEG Limited, [2009] 310 ITR 341 (MP). The facts of the said case may be noticed. The assessee became entitled to refund along with interest under Section 244A. Referring to Section 240 of the Act, the High Court observed that the term used was ―refund of any amount becomes due to the assessee‖. The same words were also used in Section 244A. Reference was made to the d…