CIT v. Sundwiger EMFG Co.

266 ITR 110Reported decision2004#4337 most cited

What is CIT v. Sundwiger EMFG Co. authority for?

A supply contract, including hardware and software, is considered a single transaction and payments for services rendered by experts are part of the sale consideration, not separate royalty payments.

27

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2018.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Sundwiger EMFG Co. · 266 ITR 110 · royalty payment · supply contract · hardware and software · single transaction · sale consideration

Issues it is cited on

installation pe section 100 section 44bb section 44b copyrighted article section 5(2)section 9(1)(vi)business connection section 9(1)(vii)computer software section 260 section 260a

Judgments citing CIT v. Sundwiger EMFG Co.

DCIT, CIR-12, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ORGANON (INDIA) PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed and that of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 751/KOL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Aug 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 195Section 40

…property cannot be regarded as a payment by way of royalty. 57. It is also to be borne in mind that the supply contract cannot be separated into two viz. hardware and software. We would like to refer the judgment of Supreme Court in CIT v. Sundwiger EMFG Co., 266 ITR 110 wherein it was held: "A plain and cumulative reading of the terms and conditions of the contract entered into between the principal to principal i.e., foreign company and Midhani i.e., preamble of the contract, Part-I and II of the contract and also the separate agreement, as referred to above, would clearly show that it was one and the same tran…

ORGANON (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. THE DCIT, CIR-12, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed and that of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 677/KOL/2014[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Aug 2018AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 195Section 40

…property cannot be regarded as a payment by way of royalty. 57. It is also to be borne in mind that the supply contract cannot be separated into two viz. hardware and software. We would like to refer the judgment of Supreme Court in CIT v. Sundwiger EMFG Co., 266 ITR 110 wherein it was held: "A plain and cumulative reading of the terms and conditions of the contract entered into between the principal to principal i.e., foreign company and Midhani i.e., preamble of the contract, Part-I and II of the contract and also the separate agreement, as referred to above, would clearly show that it was one and the same tran…

TURBO ENERGY LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the

ITA 317/CHNY/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 May 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.351/Mds/2013 & Ita Nos.316 & 317/Mds/2014 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 & Ays 2008-09 & 2009-10

Section 10BSection 10B(8)Section 80I

…ed as ‘royalty’. 6. Courts have consistently noted the difference between a transaction of sale of a ‘copyrighted article’ and one of ‘copyright’ itself. See Tata Consultancy Services Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh [2004] 271 ITR 401 [SC]; Sundwiger EMFG [2004] 266 ITR 110; Dassault Systems K.K., In Re, (2010) 229 CTR 125 [AAR]; ISRO Satellite Centre [ISAC], In Re (2008] 307 ITR 59 [AAR]; and Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co. Vs. DIT (2011] 332 ITR 340 [Delhi]. 7. The provisions of section 9(1)(vi) as a whole, would stand attracted in the case of the latter and not the former. Explanations 4 and 7 relied by th…

TURBO ENERGY LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the

ITA 316/CHNY/2014[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 May 2017AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.351/Mds/2013 & Ita Nos.316 & 317/Mds/2014 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 & Ays 2008-09 & 2009-10

Section 10BSection 10B(8)Section 80I

…ed as ‘royalty’. 6. Courts have consistently noted the difference between a transaction of sale of a ‘copyrighted article’ and one of ‘copyright’ itself. See Tata Consultancy Services Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh [2004] 271 ITR 401 [SC]; Sundwiger EMFG [2004] 266 ITR 110; Dassault Systems K.K., In Re, (2010) 229 CTR 125 [AAR]; ISRO Satellite Centre [ISAC], In Re (2008] 307 ITR 59 [AAR]; and Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co. Vs. DIT (2011] 332 ITR 340 [Delhi]. 7. The provisions of section 9(1)(vi) as a whole, would stand attracted in the case of the latter and not the former. Explanations 4 and 7 relied by th…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. TURBO ENERGEY LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the

ITA 205/CHNY/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.351/Mds/2013 & Ita Nos.316 & 317/Mds/2014 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 & Ays 2008-09 & 2009-10

Section 10BSection 10B(8)Section 80I

…ed as ‘royalty’. 6. Courts have consistently noted the difference between a transaction of sale of a ‘copyrighted article’ and one of ‘copyright’ itself. See Tata Consultancy Services Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh [2004] 271 ITR 401 [SC]; Sundwiger EMFG [2004] 266 ITR 110; Dassault Systems K.K., In Re, (2010) 229 CTR 125 [AAR]; ISRO Satellite Centre [ISAC], In Re (2008] 307 ITR 59 [AAR]; and Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co. Vs. DIT (2011] 332 ITR 340 [Delhi]. 7. The provisions of section 9(1)(vi) as a whole, would stand attracted in the case of the latter and not the former. Explanations 4 and 7 relied by th…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. TURBO ENERGEY LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the

ITA 204/CHNY/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 May 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.351/Mds/2013 & Ita Nos.316 & 317/Mds/2014 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 & Ays 2008-09 & 2009-10

Section 10BSection 10B(8)Section 80I

…ed as ‘royalty’. 6. Courts have consistently noted the difference between a transaction of sale of a ‘copyrighted article’ and one of ‘copyright’ itself. See Tata Consultancy Services Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh [2004] 271 ITR 401 [SC]; Sundwiger EMFG [2004] 266 ITR 110; Dassault Systems K.K., In Re, (2010) 229 CTR 125 [AAR]; ISRO Satellite Centre [ISAC], In Re (2008] 307 ITR 59 [AAR]; and Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co. Vs. DIT (2011] 332 ITR 340 [Delhi]. 7. The provisions of section 9(1)(vi) as a whole, would stand attracted in the case of the latter and not the former. Explanations 4 and 7 relied by th…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. TURBO ENERGEY LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the

ITA 203/CHNY/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 May 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.351/Mds/2013 & Ita Nos.316 & 317/Mds/2014 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 & Ays 2008-09 & 2009-10

Section 10BSection 10B(8)Section 80I

…ed as ‘royalty’. 6. Courts have consistently noted the difference between a transaction of sale of a ‘copyrighted article’ and one of ‘copyright’ itself. See Tata Consultancy Services Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh [2004] 271 ITR 401 [SC]; Sundwiger EMFG [2004] 266 ITR 110; Dassault Systems K.K., In Re, (2010) 229 CTR 125 [AAR]; ISRO Satellite Centre [ISAC], In Re (2008] 307 ITR 59 [AAR]; and Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co. Vs. DIT (2011] 332 ITR 340 [Delhi]. 7. The provisions of section 9(1)(vi) as a whole, would stand attracted in the case of the latter and not the former. Explanations 4 and 7 relied by th…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. TURBO ENERGY LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the

ITA 629/CHNY/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 May 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.351/Mds/2013 & Ita Nos.316 & 317/Mds/2014 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 & Ays 2008-09 & 2009-10

Section 10BSection 10B(8)Section 80I

…ed as ‘royalty’. 6. Courts have consistently noted the difference between a transaction of sale of a ‘copyrighted article’ and one of ‘copyright’ itself. See Tata Consultancy Services Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh [2004] 271 ITR 401 [SC]; Sundwiger EMFG [2004] 266 ITR 110; Dassault Systems K.K., In Re, (2010) 229 CTR 125 [AAR]; ISRO Satellite Centre [ISAC], In Re (2008] 307 ITR 59 [AAR]; and Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co. Vs. DIT (2011] 332 ITR 340 [Delhi]. 7. The provisions of section 9(1)(vi) as a whole, would stand attracted in the case of the latter and not the former. Explanations 4 and 7 relied by th…

TURBO ENERGY LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the

ITA 351/CHNY/2013[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 May 2017AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.351/Mds/2013 & Ita Nos.316 & 317/Mds/2014 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 & Ays 2008-09 & 2009-10

Section 10BSection 10B(8)Section 80I

…ed as ‘royalty’. 6. Courts have consistently noted the difference between a transaction of sale of a ‘copyrighted article’ and one of ‘copyright’ itself. See Tata Consultancy Services Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh [2004] 271 ITR 401 [SC]; Sundwiger EMFG [2004] 266 ITR 110; Dassault Systems K.K., In Re, (2010) 229 CTR 125 [AAR]; ISRO Satellite Centre [ISAC], In Re (2008] 307 ITR 59 [AAR]; and Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co. Vs. DIT (2011] 332 ITR 340 [Delhi]. 7. The provisions of section 9(1)(vi) as a whole, would stand attracted in the case of the latter and not the former. Explanations 4 and 7 relied by th…

VISTEON TECHNICAL AND SERVICES CENTRE PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3143/CHNY/2016[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2017AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

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

…ed as ‘royalty’. 6. Courts have consistently noted the difference between a transaction of sale of a ‘copyrighted article’ and one of ‘copyright’ itself. See Tata Consultancy Services Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh [2004] 271 ITR 401 [SC]; Sundwiger EMFG [2004] 266 ITR 110; Dassault Systems K.K., In Re, (2010) 229 CTR 125 [AAR]; ISRO Satellite Centre [ISAC], In Re (2008] 307 ITR 59 [AAR]; and Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co. Vs. DIT (2011] 332 ITR 340 [Delhi]. 7. The provisions of section 9(1)(vi) as a whole, would stand attracted in the case of the latter and not the former. Explanations 4 and 7 relied by th…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-2 vs. ZTE CORPORATION

ITA/908/2016HC Delhi24 Jan 2017

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

Section 133ASection 14Section 148Section 234BSection 9Section 9(1)

…ITA-904-909/2016 Page 1 of 21 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON: 16.01.2017 % PRONOUNCED ON: 24.01.2017 + ITA 904/2016, ITA 905/2016, CM APPL.46510/2016 ITA 906/2016, CM APPL.46511/2016 ITA 907/2016, CM APPL.46512/2016 ITA 908/2016, CM APPL.46513/2016 ITA 909/2016, CM APPL.46515/2016 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-2 ..... Appellant versus ZTE CORPORATION ..... Respondent Appearance: Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. P…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-2 vs. ZTE CORPORATION

ITA/905/2016HC Delhi24 Jan 2017

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

Section 133ASection 14Section 148Section 234BSection 9Section 9(1)

…ITA-904-909/2016 Page 1 of 21 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON: 16.01.2017 % PRONOUNCED ON: 24.01.2017 + ITA 904/2016, ITA 905/2016, CM APPL.46510/2016 ITA 906/2016, CM APPL.46511/2016 ITA 907/2016, CM APPL.46512/2016 ITA 908/2016, CM APPL.46513/2016 ITA 909/2016, CM APPL.46515/2016 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-2 ..... Appellant versus ZTE CORPORATION ..... Respondent Appearance: Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. P…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-2 vs. ZTE CORPORATION

ITA/909/2016HC Delhi24 Jan 2017

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

Section 133ASection 14Section 148Section 234BSection 9Section 9(1)

…ITA-904-909/2016 Page 1 of 21 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON: 16.01.2017 % PRONOUNCED ON: 24.01.2017 + ITA 904/2016, ITA 905/2016, CM APPL.46510/2016 ITA 906/2016, CM APPL.46511/2016 ITA 907/2016, CM APPL.46512/2016 ITA 908/2016, CM APPL.46513/2016 ITA 909/2016, CM APPL.46515/2016 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-2 ..... Appellant versus ZTE CORPORATION ..... Respondent Appearance: Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. P…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-2 vs. ZTE CORPORATION

ITA/907/2016HC Delhi24 Jan 2017

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

Section 133ASection 14Section 148Section 234BSection 9Section 9(1)

…ITA-904-909/2016 Page 1 of 21 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON: 16.01.2017 % PRONOUNCED ON: 24.01.2017 + ITA 904/2016, ITA 905/2016, CM APPL.46510/2016 ITA 906/2016, CM APPL.46511/2016 ITA 907/2016, CM APPL.46512/2016 ITA 908/2016, CM APPL.46513/2016 ITA 909/2016, CM APPL.46515/2016 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-2 ..... Appellant versus ZTE CORPORATION ..... Respondent Appearance: Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. P…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-2 vs. ZTE CORPORATION

ITA/906/2016HC Delhi24 Jan 2017

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

Section 133ASection 14Section 148Section 234BSection 9Section 9(1)

…ITA-904-909/2016 Page 1 of 21 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON: 16.01.2017 % PRONOUNCED ON: 24.01.2017 + ITA 904/2016, ITA 905/2016, CM APPL.46510/2016 ITA 906/2016, CM APPL.46511/2016 ITA 907/2016, CM APPL.46512/2016 ITA 908/2016, CM APPL.46513/2016 ITA 909/2016, CM APPL.46515/2016 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-2 ..... Appellant versus ZTE CORPORATION ..... Respondent Appearance: Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. P…

SOLIDWORKS CORPORATION,MUMBAI vs. ADDL DIT (IT) 2, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 8721/MUM/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2016AY 2007-08

…property cannot be regarded as a payment by way of royalty. 57.It is also to be borne in mind that the supply contract cannot be separated into two viz. hardware and software. We would like to refer the judgment of Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Sundwiger EMFG Co., 266 ITR 110 wherein it was held: "A plain and cumulative reading of the terms and conditions of the contract entered into between the principal to principal i.e., foreign company and Midhani i.e., preamble of the contract, Part-I and II of the contract and also the separate agreement, as referred to above, would clearly show that it was one and the same tran…

DASSAULT SYSTEMES SOLIDWORKS CORPORATION,CHENNAI vs. DDIT (IT) 1(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 7790/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2016AY 2009-10

Section 9(1)(vi)

…property cannot be regarded as a payment by way of royalty. 57.It is also to be borne in mind that the supply contract cannot be separated into two viz. hardware and software. We would like to refer the judgment of Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Sundwiger EMFG Co., 266 ITR 110 wherein it was held: "A plain and cumulative reading of the terms and conditions of the contract entered into between the principal to principal i.e., ,foreign company and Midhani i.e., preamble of the contract, Part-I and II of the contract and also the separate agreement, as referred to above, would clearly show that it was one and the same tra…

NOKIA NETWORKS OY vs. ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX

ITA/1138/2006HC Delhi07 Sept 2012

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

…nnot be regarded as a payment by way of royalty. 57. It is also to be borne in mind that the supply contract cannot be separated into two viz. hardware and software. We would like to refer the judgment of Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Sundwiger EMFG Co., 266 ITR 110 wherein it was held: “A plain and cumulative reading of the terms and conditions of the contract entered into between the principal to principal i.e., foreign company and Midhani i.e., preamble of the contract, Part-I and II of the contract and also the separate agreement, as referred to above, would clearly show that it was one and the…

NOKIA NETWORKS OY vs. ASSTT. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX

ITA/1137/2006HC Delhi07 Sept 2012

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

…nnot be regarded as a payment by way of royalty. 57. It is also to be borne in mind that the supply contract cannot be separated into two viz. hardware and software. We would like to refer the judgment of Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Sundwiger EMFG Co., 266 ITR 110 wherein it was held: “A plain and cumulative reading of the terms and conditions of the contract entered into between the principal to principal i.e., foreign company and Midhani i.e., preamble of the contract, Part-I and II of the contract and also the separate agreement, as referred to above, would clearly show that it was one and the…

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. UOP LIC, NEW DELHI

ITA/1324/2007HC Delhi07 Sept 2012

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

…nnot be regarded as a payment by way of royalty. 57. It is also to be borne in mind that the supply contract cannot be separated into two viz. hardware and software. We would like to refer the judgment of Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Sundwiger EMFG Co., 266 ITR 110 wherein it was held: “A plain and cumulative reading of the terms and conditions of the contract entered into between the principal to principal i.e., foreign company and Midhani i.e., preamble of the contract, Part-I and II of the contract and also the separate agreement, as referred to above, would clearly show that it was one and the…

Showing 1–20 of 27 · Page 1 of 2

CIT v. Sundwiger EMFG Co. (266 ITR 110) — Cited in 27 Judgments | BharatTax