CIT v. Wavin (India) Ltd.

236 ITR 314Supreme Court of India1996#6017 most cited
19

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 115ASection 234CSection 270ASection 9(1)(vi)(c)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 234BSection 9(1)(vi)

Issues it is cited on

section 9(l)(vi)section 14(1)copyrighted articleroyalty incomesection 115asection 9(1)(vi)business connectioncomputer softwaretax treatysection 234csection 9(1)liable to tax

Judgments citing CIT v. Wavin (India) Ltd.

QUALCOMM INCORPORATED,SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 3(1)(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2022-23 is allowed for 14

ITA 2087/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri M. S. Nethrapal, CIT DR
Section 115ASection 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 153Section 234BSection 270ASection 9

…to the payer. There is no transfer of ownership rights. Various decisions of the Supreme Courts and High Courts clarify that sales constitutes out and out transfer, whereas in license there is only right to use. Some of these decision are at 69 ITR 692 (SC), 236 ITR 314 (ASC), 811 ITR 243, 671 ITR 227. Thus this reasoning of the assessee has no legal or factual basis. In this case, the user only has a right and gets a license to use the software. Even in the OECD commentary it is mentioned that the character of payments received in transactions involving the transfer of computer software depends upon the nature…

QUALCOMM INCORPORATED,SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 3(1)(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2022-23 is allowed for 14

ITA 2086/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri M. S. Nethrapal, CIT DR
Section 115ASection 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 153Section 234BSection 270ASection 9

…to the payer. There is no transfer of ownership rights. Various decisions of the Supreme Courts and High Courts clarify that sales constitutes out and out transfer, whereas in license there is only right to use. Some of these decision are at 69 ITR 692 (SC), 236 ITR 314 (ASC), 811 ITR 243, 671 ITR 227. Thus this reasoning of the assessee has no legal or factual basis. In this case, the user only has a right and gets a license to use the software. Even in the OECD commentary it is mentioned that the character of payments received in transactions involving the transfer of computer software depends upon the nature…

QUALCOMM INCORPORATED,SAN DIEGO vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE 3(1)(1) INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIVIC CENTRE MINTO ROAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3742/DEL/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri M. Balaganeshqualcomm Incorporated, Vs. Dcit, 5775, Morehouse Drive, Circle-3(1), San Diego, California, International Taxation, Usa, 92121, Usa New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaacq1484H Assessee By : Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. Adv Shri Nishant Thakkar, Adv Ms. Jasmin Amalsadavala, Adv Shri Zoheb Balwani, Ca Revenue By: Shri Vijay B. Basanta, Cit Dr Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20/09/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 14/11/2024

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vijay B. Basanta, CIT DR
Section 115ASection 9(1)(vi)

…to the payer. There is no transfer of ownership rights. Various decisions of the Supreme Courts and High Courts clarify that sales constitutes out and out transfer, whereas in license there is only right to use. Some of these decision are at 69 ITR 692 (SC), 236 ITR 314 (ASC), 811 ITR 243, 671 ITR 227. Thus this reasoning of the assessee has no legal or factual basis. In this case, the user only has a right and gets a license to use the software. Even in the OECD commentary it is mentioned that the character of payments received in transactions involving the transfer of computer Qualcomm Incorporated software de…

QUALCOMM INCORPORATED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 3(1)(1), INTL. TAXATION, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7559/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Saktijit Dey

For Appellant: Sh. Percy J. Pardiwala, Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Sh. Gangadhar Panda, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 9(1)(vi)

…to the payer. There is no transfer of ownership rights. Various decisions of the Supreme Courts and High Courts clarify that sales constitutes out and out transfer, whereas in license there is only right to use. Some of these decision are at 69 ITR 692 (SC), 236 ITR 314 (ASC), 811 ITR 243, 671 ITR 227. Thus this reasoning of the assessee has no legal or factual basis. In this case, the user only has a right and gets a license to use the software. Even in the OECD commentary it is mentioned that the character of payments received in transactions involving the transfer of computer software depends upon the nature…

QUALCOMM INCORPORATED,USA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 3(1)(1), INTL. TAXATION, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7894/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Saktijit Dey

For Appellant: Sh. Percy J. Pardiwala, Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Sh. Gangadhar Panda, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 9(1)(vi)

…to the payer. There is no transfer of ownership rights. Various decisions of the Supreme Courts and High Courts clarify that sales constitutes out and out transfer, whereas in license there is only right to use. Some of these decision are at 69 ITR 692 (SC), 236 ITR 314 (ASC), 811 ITR 243, 671 ITR 227. Thus this reasoning of the assessee has no legal or factual basis. In this case, the user only has a right and gets a license to use the software. Even in the OECD commentary it is mentioned that the character of payments received in transactions involving the transfer of computer software depends upon the nature…

M/S SHRIRAM CAPITAL LTD, CHENNAI vs. ACIT,CORPORATE CIRCLE 3(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in I

ITA 272/CHNY/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A No.:272/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Year 2017 - 2018

For Appellant: Mr. S. Gautham VenkataFor Respondent: Mr. P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 32

…on such capital asset is to be allowed. The case law relied upon by the Assessee is different from the facts of the instant case, in that, the issue considered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Wavin (India) Limited [236 ITR 314] was expenditure incurred to obtain benefit of research and development made by the foreign company, but not payment on account of the royalty. Hence, the decision referred to is not applicable to the case of the Assessee. Further, though the issue of Artistic Copy Right Fee paid has been held in favour of the Assessee by the Income Tax Appellat…

ELI LILLY AND COMPANY INDIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CIRCEL-1(1), GURGAON

ITA 7487/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Oct 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vinay Kumar Karan, CIT-DR
Section 32

…CIT v. Ciba India Ltd.: 69 ITR 692 (SC);Alembic Chemical Works Co. Ltd. v. CIT: 177 ITR 377 (SC);CIT vs. British India Corp. Ltd.: 165 ITR 51 (SC);CIT v. Indian Oxygen Ltd.: 218 ITR 337 (SC);CIT v. IAEC (Pumps) Ltd: 232 ITR 316 (SC) ;CIT v. Wavin (India) Ltd. 236 ITR 314 (SC) and CIT vs. British India Corp. Ltd. [1987] 165 ITR 51 (SC)and also, the recent decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Hilton Roulands Ltd vs. CIT 255 taxman 209 for the principle that payment made for obtaining access to information and restricted license to the limited use of knowhow, should be treated as Revenue…

SHRIRAMINSIGHT SHARE BROKERS LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 6(1), CHENNAI

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

ITA 2975/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Oct 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.2975/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shriram Insight Share Brokers Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of Mookambika Complex, No. 4, Lady Vs. Income Tax, Desika Road, Mylapore, Corporate Circle – 6(1), Chennai 600 004. Chennai. [Pan: Aaaci2727H] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Gautham Venketanarayanan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri J. Pavitran Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 16.09.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 11.10.2019 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-15, Chennai Dated 31.07.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2014-15. The Grounds Raised In The Appeal Of The Assessee Are That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Part Disallowance Made Under Section 14A R.W. Rule 8D, Disallowance Of Depreciation In Respect Of Royalty, Disallowance Of Bad Debt & Part

For Appellant: Shri S. Gautham VenketanarayananFor Respondent: Shri J. Pavitran Kumar, JCIT
Section 115JSection 14A

…n ITA No.1899/Mds/2015 vide order dated 11.04.2013, the Chennai Bench of the Tribunal allowed the claim of royalty expenses as revenue expenditure. The assessee also relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Apex court in the CIT vs. Wavin (India) Ltd reported in 236 ITR 314, wherein the identical issue was held in favour of the assessee. However, the Ld.AO 5 I.T.A. No.2975/Chny/18 rejected the claim of the assessee and disallowed the royalty expenses by treating it as capital expenditure but allowed depreciation @ 25% by observing as under: “Further, though the issue of royalty payments has been held in favour of…

QUALCOMM TECHNOLOGIES INC.,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 3(1)(1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION , NEW DELHI

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

ITA 7230/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. H. S. Sidhu & Sh. R. K. Pandaassessment Year: 2013-14

Section 234Section 234CSection 271Section 9

…to the payer. There is no transfer of ownership rights. Various decisions of the Supreme Courts and High Courts clarify that sales constitutes out and out transfer, whereas in license there is only right to use. Some of these decision are at 69 ITR 692 (SC), 236 ITR 314 (ASC), 811 ITR 243, 671 ITR227. Thus this reasoning of the assessee has no legal or factual basis. In this case, the user only has a right and gets a license to use the software. Even in the OECD commentary it is mentioned that the character of payments received in transactions involving the transfer of computer software depends upon the nature…

QUALCOMM TECHNOLOGIES INC.,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 3(1)(1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION , NEW DELHI

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

ITA 7231/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: PendingITAT Delhi12 Feb 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2014-15 Qualcomm Technologies Inc., Vs. Dcit, S.R. Batliboi & Co., Circle 3(1)(1), Oval Office, 18, Ilabs Centre, International Taxation, Hitech City, Madhapur, New Delhi. Hyderabad. Pan: Aaacq3149D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nishant Thakkar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri G.K. Dhall, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.02.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 12.02.2019 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 21St September, 2017 Of The Cit(A)-23, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Qualcomm Technologies Inc. (Qti) Is A Company Incorporated In The United States Of America & Is A Wholly Owned Subsidiary Of Qualcomm Incorporated, Usa (‘Qualcomm’). Pursuant To A Corporate Restructuring With Effect From 1St October, 2012, Substantially All The Principal Business Units Of Qualcomm (I.E., Qualcomm Cdma Technologies (‘Qct’)

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.K. Dhall, CIT, DR

…to the payer. There is no transfer of ownership rights. Various decisions of the Supreme Courts and High Courts clarify that sales constitutes out and out transfer, whereas in license there is only right to use. Some of these decision are at 69 ITR 692 (SC), 236 ITR 314 (ASC), 811 ITR 243, 671 ITR227. Thus this reasoning of the assessee has no legal or factual basis. In this case, the user only has a right and gets a license to use the software. Even in the OECD commentary it is mentioned that the character of payments received in transactions involving the transfer of computer software depends upon the nature…

LG ELECTRONICS INDIA (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NOIDA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for

ITA 3613/DEL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jul 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 201(1)Section 251(1)(a)Section 40Section 80JSection 92C

…or invention and was prohibited from disclosing them after termination of agreement and further the agreement was terminable even prior to the period specified therein. The payment so made was held to be of revenue nature. In CIT Vs Wavin (India) Ltd. (1996) 236 ITR 314 (SC), payment made by that assessee was under nonexclusive and non-transferable agreement for the use of technical information, which was held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court as a revenue expenditure. 16.3. In contrast to above decisions holding payment of royalty as a revenue expenditure, there is a line of judgments holding the payment of royalty…

LG ELECTRONICS INDIA (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NOIDA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for

ITA 3612/DEL/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jul 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 201(1)Section 251(1)(a)Section 40Section 80JSection 92C

…or invention and was prohibited from disclosing them after termination of agreement and further the agreement was terminable even prior to the period specified therein. The payment so made was held to be of revenue nature. In CIT Vs Wavin (India) Ltd. (1996) 236 ITR 314 (SC), payment made by that assessee was under nonexclusive and non-transferable agreement for the use of technical information, which was held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court as a revenue expenditure. 16.3. In contrast to above decisions holding payment of royalty as a revenue expenditure, there is a line of judgments holding the payment of royalty…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. SHRIRAM INSIGHT SHARE BROKERS LTD., CHENNAI

In the result appeal of the assessee as well as that of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3080/CHNY/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jun 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Respondent: Shri A.V. Sreekanth, JCIT
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 234DSection 250(6)

…ITA No.1899/Mds/2015 vide order dated 11.04.2013, the Chennai Bench of the Tribunal allowed the claim of royalty expenses as revenue expenditure. The assessee also relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Apex court in the CIT vs. Wavin (India) Ltd reported in 236 ITR 314, wherein the identical issue was held in favour of the assessee. However, the Ld.AO rejected the claim of the assessee and disallowed the royalty expenses by treating it as capital expenditure but allowed depreciation @ 25% by observing as under: “Further, though the issue of royalty payments has been held in favour of the assessee’s group compa…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. SHRIRAM CREDIT CO. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result appeal of the assessee as well as that of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2895/CHNY/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jun 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri R. Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.V. Sreekanth, JCIT
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 250(6)

…n the identical issue in the case of group company the Chennai Bench of the Tribunal allowed the claim of royalty expenses as revenue expenditure. The assessee also relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Apex court in the CIT vs. Wavin (India) Ltd reported in 236 ITR 314, wherein the identical issue was held in favour of the assessee. However, the Ld.AO rejected the claim of the assessee and disallowed the royalty expenses by treating it as capital expenditure but allowed depreciation @ 25%. On appeal, the Ld.CIT(A) following the decision of the Chennai Bench of the Tribunal deleted the addition made by the Ld.A…

SHRIRAM CREDIT CO. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result appeal of the assessee as well as that of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2749/CHNY/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jun 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri R. Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.V. Sreekanth, JCIT
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 250(6)

…n the identical issue in the case of group company the Chennai Bench of the Tribunal allowed the claim of royalty expenses as revenue expenditure. The assessee also relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Apex court in the CIT vs. Wavin (India) Ltd reported in 236 ITR 314, wherein the identical issue was held in favour of the assessee. However, the Ld.AO rejected the claim of the assessee and disallowed the royalty expenses by treating it as capital expenditure but allowed depreciation @ 25%. On appeal, the Ld.CIT(A) following the decision of the Chennai Bench of the Tribunal deleted the addition made by the Ld.A…

SHRIRAM INSIGHT SHARE BROKERS LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result appeal of the assessee as well as that of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2747/CHNY/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jun 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Respondent: Shri A.V. Sreekanth, JCIT
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 234DSection 250(6)

…ITA No.1899/Mds/2015 vide order dated 11.04.2013, the Chennai Bench of the Tribunal allowed the claim of royalty expenses as revenue expenditure. The assessee also relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Apex court in the CIT vs. Wavin (India) Ltd reported in 236 ITR 314, wherein the identical issue was held in favour of the assessee. However, the Ld.AO rejected the claim of the assessee and disallowed the royalty expenses by treating it as capital expenditure but allowed depreciation @ 25% by observing as under: “Further, though the issue of royalty payments has been held in favour of the assessee’s group compa…

M/S HERO HONDA MOTORS LTD,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2148/DEL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Feb 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Sh C.M.Garg & Shri Prashant Maharishihero Honda Motors Ltd, Dcit, 34, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, Circle-12(1), Vs. New Delhi New Delhi Pan:Aaacg0812J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. AK Saroha, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 263Section 32Section 37(1)Section 40Section 9

…the currency and also after determination of the agreement, the expenditure incurred was revenue in nature and was not for purposes of bringing into existence any asset or benefit of enduring nature. The Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Wavin (India) Ltd. 236 ITR 314 affirmed the decision of the Madras High Court holding that where (here was no sale of technical know-how, but the appellant was merely given right to use the technical information the payment made for the use of such know how were allowable as revenue deduction. The jurisdictional High Court, too, has consistently taken the view that where the a…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-IV vs. HERO HONDA MOTORS LIMITED

ITA/694/2011HC Delhi03 Feb 2015

…e 5 of 20 7. The aforesaid legal position finds resonance in subsequent decisions of the Supreme Court in CIT vs. British Indian Corp. Ltd. (1987) 165 ITR 51 (SC), CIT vs. Indian Oxygen Ltd. (1996) 218 ITR 337 (SC) and CIT vs. Wavin (India) Ltd. (1999) 236 ITR 314 (SC). These were not cases of outright sale of technical information and know-how and what was granted was non-exclusive or non-transferrable right to use. In Indian Oxygen (supra), the Indian company was not entitled to use the know-how after termination of agreement. 8. Absence of stipulation as to duration of time for use of know-ho…

CIT vs. SAMTEL GLASS LTD

ITA - 1253 / 2011HC Delhi12 Dec 2011

…nonexclusive license for the use of technical information and there being no acquisition of any asset as such, the expenditure would be an allowable deduction and in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Wavin (India) Ltd., 236 ITR 314 (SC), referred to by the CIT (A), it would not be a case of acquisition of asset. It is case of running royalty paid on the basis of percentage of sales made by the assessee and would be of a revenue character. The royalty payment is for services in respect of stage after installation of the plant and on the sale of item manufactured with the hel…

CIT v. Wavin (India) Ltd. (236 ITR 314) — Cited in 19 Judgments | BharatTax