What is Director of Income-tax v. New Skies Satellite authority for?

Payments for uploading and displaying banner advertisements on a foreign company's portal are treated as business profits, not royalty, under tax treaties.

How many judgments cite Director of Income-tax v. New Skies Satellite?

37 judgments on BharatTax cite Director of Income-tax v. New Skies Satellite (140 TTJ 195), spanning 2017 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Director of Income-tax v. New Skies Satellite come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 144C(13), Section 12, Section 12(3)(a), Section 12(4)(b), Section 142(1).

Director of Income-tax v. New Skies Satellite (140 TTJ 195)

EDENRED PTE LTD ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT INT. TAXATIONAL 2(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 749/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jul 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhailedenred Pte Ltd., C/O. Walker Chandiok & Co. Llp, 16Th Floor, Tower Lll, One International Center, S B Marg, Prabhadevi (West), ............... Appellant Mumbai-400013. Pan : Aacce8636P V/S Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax – International Taxation -2(2)(1), Room No. 606, 6Th Floor, ……………… Respondent Kautilya Bhavan, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai – 400051. Assessee By : Shri Jitendra Singh/Ms. Shivali Mhatre Revenue By : Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra Singh/Ms. Shivali MhatreFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr.DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

…rvices offered by the portal would be covered by the expression royalty. We find that subsequently, after considering the decision in Cargo Community Network (P.) Ltd. (supra), Mumbai ITAT in the case of Standard Chartered Bank 11 ITR 721 and Yahoo India Pvt. 140 TTJ 195 held that no part Edenred Pte ltd. 15 ITA Nos. 1718/M/2014 254/M/2015& 507/M/2016 of the payment could be said to be for use of specialized software on which data is processed as no right or privilege was granted to the company to independently use the computer. In the case IMT Labs (India) (P.) Ltd. (supra), the assessee, on Indian company, ente…

INTERNATIONAL AIR TRANSPORT ASSOCIATION,MUMBAI (FOR SENDING NOTICES) vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) - CIRCLE 2(2)(1), MUMBAI

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

ITA 3330/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3330/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2020-21) International Air V/S. Dcit (It), Circle 2(2)(1), Transport Association बिधम Mumbai C/O Ernst & Young Llp Room No. 1722, 17Th Floor, 14Th Floor, The Ruby, 29, Air India Building, Senapati Bapat Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai, Dadar (West), Mumbai, Maharashtra-400021 Maharashtra-400028 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aacci4695N Appellant/अपीलधर्थी .. Respondent/प्रनिवधदी

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka and Shri DiveshFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar

…e India-Canada tax treaty. Our aforesaid view that consideration received by an assessee for providing advertising space cannot be held as 'royalty' in its hands is fortified by the order of the ITAT, Mumbai in the case of Yahoo India (P) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2011) 140 TTJ 195 (Mum). In the said case, it was observed by the Tribunal that the payment made by the assessee to a foreign company for the services rendered by it for uploading and display of the banner P a g e | 24 A.Y. 2020-21 International Air Transport Association advertisement on its portal was in the nature of business profit and not royalty. It was held…

INTERNATIONAL AIR TRANSPORT ASSOCIATION (CANADA) ,MUMBAI vs. ACIT (IT), RANGE 2 (2)(1), MUMBAI

Accordingly Ground No. 3 to 7 are allowed

ITA 7117/MUM/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka, Shri DiveshFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 234A

…e India-Canada tax treaty. Our aforesaid view that consideration received by an assessee for providing advertising space cannot be held as „royalty‟ in its hands is fortified by the order of the ITAT, Mumbai in the case of Yahoo India (P) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2011) 140 TTJ 195 (Mum). In the said case, it was observed by the Tribunal that the payment made by the assessee to a foreign company for the services rendered by it for uploading and display of the banner advertisement on its portal was in the nature of business profit and not royalty. It was held by the Tribunal as under : “8. As already noted by us, the payment…

INTERNATIONAL AIR ASSOCIATION (CANADA),MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) RANGE 2 (2)(1), MUMBAI

Accordingly Ground No. 3 to 7 are allowed

ITA 7072/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka, Shri DiveshFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 234A

…e India-Canada tax treaty. Our aforesaid view that consideration received by an assessee for providing advertising space cannot be held as „royalty‟ in its hands is fortified by the order of the ITAT, Mumbai in the case of Yahoo India (P) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2011) 140 TTJ 195 (Mum). In the said case, it was observed by the Tribunal that the payment made by the assessee to a foreign company for the services rendered by it for uploading and display of the banner advertisement on its portal was in the nature of business profit and not royalty. It was held by the Tribunal as under : “8. As already noted by us, the payment…

INTERNATINAL AIR TRANSPORT ASSOCIATION (CANADA),MUMBAI vs. DCIT (IT) 2(2)(1), MUMBAI

Accordingly Ground No. 3 to 7 are allowed

ITA 7416/MUM/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka, Shri DiveshFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 234A

…e India-Canada tax treaty. Our aforesaid view that consideration received by an assessee for providing advertising space cannot be held as „royalty‟ in its hands is fortified by the order of the ITAT, Mumbai in the case of Yahoo India (P) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2011) 140 TTJ 195 (Mum). In the said case, it was observed by the Tribunal that the payment made by the assessee to a foreign company for the services rendered by it for uploading and display of the banner advertisement on its portal was in the nature of business profit and not royalty. It was held by the Tribunal as under : “8. As already noted by us, the payment…

EDENRED PTE LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT IT 2 (2) (1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3231/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Apr 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopaledenred Pte. Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of C/O, Walker Chandiok & Income-Tax, International Co. Llp, 11Th Floor, Tower Taxation-2(2)(1) Ii, One International Room No.1722,17Th Floor, Center, S.B. Marg, Air India Building, Prabhadevi (West), Nariman Point, Mumbai Mumbai – 400013 Maharashtra – 400021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aacce8636P Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Jitendra Singh Respondent By : Anil Sant Date Of Hearing 13.03.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 12.04.2024

For Appellant: Jitendra SinghFor Respondent: Anil Sant

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

…P a g e | 1 Edenred Pte. Ltd. Vs. DCIT, IT-2(2)(1) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER Edenred Pte. Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of C/o, Walker Chandiok & Income-tax, International Co. LLP, 11th Floor, Tower Taxation-2(2)(1) II, One International Room No.1722,17th Floor, Center, S.B. Marg, Air India Building, Prabhadevi (West), Nariman Point, Mumbai Mumbai – 400013 Maharashtra – 400021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No:AACCE8636P Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Jitendra Singh Respondent by : Ani…

EDENRED SE (FORMERLY KNOWN AS EDENRED SA,MUMBAI vs. DY. COMM OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-2(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1563/MUM/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Aug 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthi () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

…1 ITA 1563/Mum/2022 Edenred SE IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “I”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHI (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND MS. PADMAVATHY S. (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A. No.1563/Mum/2022 (Assessment year 2019-20) Edenred SE (Formerly known as vs Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Edenred SA), C/o Walker Chandiok International Taxation-2(2)(1), Room & Co LLP, 11th Floor, Tower II, One No.1722, 17th Floor, Air India International Centre, S B Marg, Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai- Prabhadevi (W), Mumbai-400 013 400 021 PAN : AACCE9031G APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee represented by Shri Jitendra Sing…

ATOS INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (SINGAPORE ) PTE. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (INTL TAX) RG., 1(1) (2) , MUMBAI

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

ITA 671/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Dinesh Bafna a/wFor Respondent: Ms. Surabhi Sharma

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 234BSection 270ASection 9(1)(vi)Section 9(1)(vii)

…. Atos Information Technology (Singapore) Pte Ltd. ITA no.671/Mum./2022 We find that subsequently, after considering the decision in Cargo Community Network (P.) Ltd. (supra), Mumbai ITAT in the case of Standard Chartered Bank 11 ITR 721 and Yahoo India Pvt. 140 TTJ 195 held that no part Edenred Pte Ltd. or privilege was granted to the company to independently use the computer. In the case IMT Labs (India) (P.) Ltd. (supra), the assessee, an Indian company, entered into an agreement with a non-resident American company for securing license of a particular software, which the applicant is entitled to use. The app…

GOOGLE IRELAND LTD,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (IT), CIRCLE-1(1), BENGALURU

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

ITA 2845/BANG/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Feb 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S.It(It)A No. 2845/Bang/2017 (Assessment Year: 2007-08)

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 195Section 201Section 234BSection 9

…4/Chny/2016, decision dated 18.02.2019 (ITAT-Chennai)], viii. ITO v. Right Florists Pvt. Ltd., (2013) SCC OnLine ITAT 6870 (ITAT - Koikata), ix. Pinstorm Technologies (P.) Ltd. v, ITO, (2012) 54 SOT 78 (ITAT - Mumbai), x. Yahoo India (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT, (2011) 140 TTJ 195 (ITAT-Mumbai). 6. The learned A.R. submitted that if the issue is decided on merits the other grounds relating to reopening of assessment, etc. may be left open. 7. The learned D.R., on the other hand, strongly relied on the orders of the TPO and DRP. The learned D.R. has filed elaborate written submission, which is reproduced below: - “GOA Nos.…

EDENRED PTE LTD,MUMBAI vs. DY. COMM OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-2(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1562/MUM/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Dec 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra SinghFor Respondent: Shri Amit Kumar Soni

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 9(1)(vi)

…rvices offered by the portal would be covered by the expression royalty. We find that subsequently, after considering the decision in Cargo Community Network (P.) Ltd. (supra), Mumbai ITAT in the case of Standard Chartered Bank 11 ITR 721 and Yahoo India Pvt. 140 TTJ 195 held that no part Edenred Pte ltd. 15 ITA Nos. 1718/M/2014 254/M/2015& 507/M/2016 of the payment could be said to be for use of specialized software on which data is processed as no right or privilege was granted to the company to independently use the computer. In the case IMT Labs (India) (P.) Ltd. (supra), the assessee, on Indian company, ente…

EDENRED SA,MUMBAI vs. ACIT (IT) 2(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, this appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 5193/MUM/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra SinghFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)

…expression royalty. Edenred SA A.Y. 2012–13, 2013–14, 2014–15 & 2015–16 We find that subsequently, after considering the decision in Cargo Community Network (P.) Ltd. (supra), Mumbai ITAT in the case of Standard Chartered Bank 11 ITR 721 and Yahoo India Pvt. 140 TTJ 195 held that no part of the payment could be said to be for use of specialized software on which data is processed as no right or privilege was granted to the company to independently use the computer. In the case IMT Labs (India) (P) Ltd. (supra), the assessee, an Indian company, entered into an agreement with a non-resident American company for se…

EDENRED SA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (IT) 2(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, this appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 7248/MUM/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra SinghFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)

…expression royalty. Edenred SA A.Y. 2012–13, 2013–14, 2014–15 & 2015–16 We find that subsequently, after considering the decision in Cargo Community Network (P.) Ltd. (supra), Mumbai ITAT in the case of Standard Chartered Bank 11 ITR 721 and Yahoo India Pvt. 140 TTJ 195 held that no part of the payment could be said to be for use of specialized software on which data is processed as no right or privilege was granted to the company to independently use the computer. In the case IMT Labs (India) (P) Ltd. (supra), the assessee, an Indian company, entered into an agreement with a non-resident American company for se…

EDENRED SA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (IT) 2(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, this appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 7247/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra SinghFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)

…expression royalty. Edenred SA A.Y. 2012–13, 2013–14, 2014–15 & 2015–16 We find that subsequently, after considering the decision in Cargo Community Network (P.) Ltd. (supra), Mumbai ITAT in the case of Standard Chartered Bank 11 ITR 721 and Yahoo India Pvt. 140 TTJ 195 held that no part of the payment could be said to be for use of specialized software on which data is processed as no right or privilege was granted to the company to independently use the computer. In the case IMT Labs (India) (P) Ltd. (supra), the assessee, an Indian company, entered into an agreement with a non-resident American company for se…

EDENRED SA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (IT) 2(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, this appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 508/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra SinghFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)

…expression royalty. Edenred SA A.Y. 2012–13, 2013–14, 2014–15 & 2015–16 We find that subsequently, after considering the decision in Cargo Community Network (P.) Ltd. (supra), Mumbai ITAT in the case of Standard Chartered Bank 11 ITR 721 and Yahoo India Pvt. 140 TTJ 195 held that no part of the payment could be said to be for use of specialized software on which data is processed as no right or privilege was granted to the company to independently use the computer. In the case IMT Labs (India) (P) Ltd. (supra), the assessee, an Indian company, entered into an agreement with a non-resident American company for se…

M/S GOOGLE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DY. D.I.T., BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1516/BANG/2013[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am It(Tp)A No.1513/Bang/2013 : Asst.Year 2009-2010 It(Tp)A No.1514/Bang/2013 : Asst.Year 2010-2011 It(Tp)A No.1515/Bang/2013 : Asst.Year 2011-2012 It(Tp)A No.1516/Bang/2013 : Asst.Year 2012-2013 M/S.Google India Private Limited The Deputy Commissioner Of No.3, Rmz Infinity Tower-E Income-Tax (International V. 4Th Floor, Old Madras Road Taxation), Circle 1(1) Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 016. Pan : Aaccg0527D. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sri.Percy Pardiwala, Sr.Advocate, Sri.Anmol Anand, Advocate, Miss.Priya Tandon, Advocate & Sri.Vinay Mangla, Ca Respondent By : Sri.K.V.Aravind, Standing Counsel Date Of Pronouncement : 19.10.2022 Date Of Hearing : 13.09.2022 O R D E R Per George George K, Jm : These Appeals At The Instance Of The Assessee Were Originally Disposed By The Itat Vide Its Common Order Dated 23.10.2017. On Further Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee, The Hon’Ble High Court Vide Judgment Dated 17.04.2021 In Ita No.883/2017, 897/2017 To 899/2017, Restored The Matter To The Itat For De Novo Consideration. The Relevant Finding Of The Hon’Ble High Court Reads As Follows:-

For Appellant: Sri.Percy Pardiwala, Sr.Advocate, Sri.Anmol AnandFor Respondent: Sri.K.V.Aravind, Standing Counsel

Section 201Section 201(3)Section 9(1)(vi)

…74/Chny/2016, decision dated 18.02.2019 (ITAT – Chennai)], 8. ITO v. Right Florists Pvt. Ltd., (2013) SCC OnLine ITAT 6870 (ITAT – Kolkata), 9. Pinstorm Technologies (P.) Ltd. v. ITO, (2012) 54 SOT 78 (ITAT – Mumbai), 10. Yahoo India (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT, (2011) 140 TTJ 195 (ITAT – Mumbai). 9. It was submitted that in the above cases, the Tribunal had held that for purchase of online advertisement space cannot be characterized as “royalty” and hence, the same are not chargeable to tax in India, in the absence of PE of the non-resident in India. Further, it was contended that the entire case of the Revenue heavily h…

M/S GOOGLE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DY. D.I.T., BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1515/BANG/2013[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Oct 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am It(Tp)A No.1513/Bang/2013 : Asst.Year 2009-2010 It(Tp)A No.1514/Bang/2013 : Asst.Year 2010-2011 It(Tp)A No.1515/Bang/2013 : Asst.Year 2011-2012 It(Tp)A No.1516/Bang/2013 : Asst.Year 2012-2013 M/S.Google India Private Limited The Deputy Commissioner Of No.3, Rmz Infinity Tower-E Income-Tax (International V. 4Th Floor, Old Madras Road Taxation), Circle 1(1) Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 016. Pan : Aaccg0527D. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sri.Percy Pardiwala, Sr.Advocate, Sri.Anmol Anand, Advocate, Miss.Priya Tandon, Advocate & Sri.Vinay Mangla, Ca Respondent By : Sri.K.V.Aravind, Standing Counsel Date Of Pronouncement : 19.10.2022 Date Of Hearing : 13.09.2022 O R D E R Per George George K, Jm : These Appeals At The Instance Of The Assessee Were Originally Disposed By The Itat Vide Its Common Order Dated 23.10.2017. On Further Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee, The Hon’Ble High Court Vide Judgment Dated 17.04.2021 In Ita No.883/2017, 897/2017 To 899/2017, Restored The Matter To The Itat For De Novo Consideration. The Relevant Finding Of The Hon’Ble High Court Reads As Follows:-

For Appellant: Sri.Percy Pardiwala, Sr.Advocate, Sri.Anmol AnandFor Respondent: Sri.K.V.Aravind, Standing Counsel

Section 201Section 201(3)Section 9(1)(vi)

…74/Chny/2016, decision dated 18.02.2019 (ITAT – Chennai)], 8. ITO v. Right Florists Pvt. Ltd., (2013) SCC OnLine ITAT 6870 (ITAT – Kolkata), 9. Pinstorm Technologies (P.) Ltd. v. ITO, (2012) 54 SOT 78 (ITAT – Mumbai), 10. Yahoo India (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT, (2011) 140 TTJ 195 (ITAT – Mumbai). 9. It was submitted that in the above cases, the Tribunal had held that for purchase of online advertisement space cannot be characterized as “royalty” and hence, the same are not chargeable to tax in India, in the absence of PE of the non-resident in India. Further, it was contended that the entire case of the Revenue heavily h…

M/S GOOGLE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DY. D.I.T., BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1514/BANG/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am It(Tp)A No.1513/Bang/2013 : Asst.Year 2009-2010 It(Tp)A No.1514/Bang/2013 : Asst.Year 2010-2011 It(Tp)A No.1515/Bang/2013 : Asst.Year 2011-2012 It(Tp)A No.1516/Bang/2013 : Asst.Year 2012-2013 M/S.Google India Private Limited The Deputy Commissioner Of No.3, Rmz Infinity Tower-E Income-Tax (International V. 4Th Floor, Old Madras Road Taxation), Circle 1(1) Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 016. Pan : Aaccg0527D. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sri.Percy Pardiwala, Sr.Advocate, Sri.Anmol Anand, Advocate, Miss.Priya Tandon, Advocate & Sri.Vinay Mangla, Ca Respondent By : Sri.K.V.Aravind, Standing Counsel Date Of Pronouncement : 19.10.2022 Date Of Hearing : 13.09.2022 O R D E R Per George George K, Jm : These Appeals At The Instance Of The Assessee Were Originally Disposed By The Itat Vide Its Common Order Dated 23.10.2017. On Further Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee, The Hon’Ble High Court Vide Judgment Dated 17.04.2021 In Ita No.883/2017, 897/2017 To 899/2017, Restored The Matter To The Itat For De Novo Consideration. The Relevant Finding Of The Hon’Ble High Court Reads As Follows:-

For Appellant: Sri.Percy Pardiwala, Sr.Advocate, Sri.Anmol AnandFor Respondent: Sri.K.V.Aravind, Standing Counsel

Section 201Section 201(3)Section 9(1)(vi)

…74/Chny/2016, decision dated 18.02.2019 (ITAT – Chennai)], 8. ITO v. Right Florists Pvt. Ltd., (2013) SCC OnLine ITAT 6870 (ITAT – Kolkata), 9. Pinstorm Technologies (P.) Ltd. v. ITO, (2012) 54 SOT 78 (ITAT – Mumbai), 10. Yahoo India (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT, (2011) 140 TTJ 195 (ITAT – Mumbai). 9. It was submitted that in the above cases, the Tribunal had held that for purchase of online advertisement space cannot be characterized as “royalty” and hence, the same are not chargeable to tax in India, in the absence of PE of the non-resident in India. Further, it was contended that the entire case of the Revenue heavily h…

M/S GOOGLE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DY. D.I.T., BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1513/BANG/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am It(Tp)A No.1513/Bang/2013 : Asst.Year 2009-2010 It(Tp)A No.1514/Bang/2013 : Asst.Year 2010-2011 It(Tp)A No.1515/Bang/2013 : Asst.Year 2011-2012 It(Tp)A No.1516/Bang/2013 : Asst.Year 2012-2013 M/S.Google India Private Limited The Deputy Commissioner Of No.3, Rmz Infinity Tower-E Income-Tax (International V. 4Th Floor, Old Madras Road Taxation), Circle 1(1) Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 016. Pan : Aaccg0527D. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sri.Percy Pardiwala, Sr.Advocate, Sri.Anmol Anand, Advocate, Miss.Priya Tandon, Advocate & Sri.Vinay Mangla, Ca Respondent By : Sri.K.V.Aravind, Standing Counsel Date Of Pronouncement : 19.10.2022 Date Of Hearing : 13.09.2022 O R D E R Per George George K, Jm : These Appeals At The Instance Of The Assessee Were Originally Disposed By The Itat Vide Its Common Order Dated 23.10.2017. On Further Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee, The Hon’Ble High Court Vide Judgment Dated 17.04.2021 In Ita No.883/2017, 897/2017 To 899/2017, Restored The Matter To The Itat For De Novo Consideration. The Relevant Finding Of The Hon’Ble High Court Reads As Follows:-

For Appellant: Sri.Percy Pardiwala, Sr.Advocate, Sri.Anmol AnandFor Respondent: Sri.K.V.Aravind, Standing Counsel

Section 201Section 201(3)Section 9(1)(vi)

…74/Chny/2016, decision dated 18.02.2019 (ITAT – Chennai)], 8. ITO v. Right Florists Pvt. Ltd., (2013) SCC OnLine ITAT 6870 (ITAT – Kolkata), 9. Pinstorm Technologies (P.) Ltd. v. ITO, (2012) 54 SOT 78 (ITAT – Mumbai), 10. Yahoo India (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT, (2011) 140 TTJ 195 (ITAT – Mumbai). 9. It was submitted that in the above cases, the Tribunal had held that for purchase of online advertisement space cannot be characterized as “royalty” and hence, the same are not chargeable to tax in India, in the absence of PE of the non-resident in India. Further, it was contended that the entire case of the Revenue heavily h…

M/S. ARIBA INC.,GURGAON vs. ADIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee stand partly

ITA 1470/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2022AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Sinha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 115ASection 182Section 234BSection 28Section 44DSection 9(1)

…erely receives a service without control or possession of the equipment, no royalty can arise. 27. To the same effect are the following decisions: • Director of Income-tax v. New Skies Satellite BY (2016) 382 ITR 114 (Del HC) • Yahoo India (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT 140 TTJ 195 (Mumbai) 28. It is submitted that at no point of time the control of equipment is exclusively granted to Ariba India or its clients. The observations of the CIT(A) @ para 49 of the Impugned Order for AYs 2004-05 to 2006-07) regarding control of the equipment by grant of access through userid and password is wholly erroneous. 29. Right to use wo…

M/S. ARIBA INC.,GURGAON vs. ADIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee stand partly

ITA 1469/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Sinha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 115ASection 182Section 234BSection 28Section 44DSection 9(1)

…erely receives a service without control or possession of the equipment, no royalty can arise. 27. To the same effect are the following decisions: • Director of Income-tax v. New Skies Satellite BY (2016) 382 ITR 114 (Del HC) • Yahoo India (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT 140 TTJ 195 (Mumbai) 28. It is submitted that at no point of time the control of equipment is exclusively granted to Ariba India or its clients. The observations of the CIT(A) @ para 49 of the Impugned Order for AYs 2004-05 to 2006-07) regarding control of the equipment by grant of access through userid and password is wholly erroneous. 29. Right to use wo…

Director of Income-tax v. New Skies Satellite

What is Director of Income-tax v. New Skies Satellite authority for?

Also referred to as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Director of Income-tax v. New Skies Satellite

EDENRED PTE LTD ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT INT. TAXATIONAL 2(2)(1), MUMBAI

INTERNATIONAL AIR TRANSPORT ASSOCIATION,MUMBAI (FOR SENDING NOTICES) vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) - CIRCLE 2(2)(1), MUMBAI

INTERNATIONAL AIR TRANSPORT ASSOCIATION (CANADA) ,MUMBAI vs. ACIT (IT), RANGE 2 (2)(1), MUMBAI

INTERNATIONAL AIR ASSOCIATION (CANADA),MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) RANGE 2 (2)(1), MUMBAI

INTERNATINAL AIR TRANSPORT ASSOCIATION (CANADA),MUMBAI vs. DCIT (IT) 2(2)(1), MUMBAI

EDENRED PTE LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT IT 2 (2) (1), MUMBAI

EDENRED SE (FORMERLY KNOWN AS EDENRED SA,MUMBAI vs. DY. COMM OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-2(2), MUMBAI

ATOS INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (SINGAPORE ) PTE. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (INTL TAX) RG., 1(1) (2) , MUMBAI

GOOGLE IRELAND LTD,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (IT), CIRCLE-1(1), BENGALURU

EDENRED PTE LTD,MUMBAI vs. DY. COMM OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-2(2), MUMBAI

EDENRED SA,MUMBAI vs. ACIT (IT) 2(2)(1), MUMBAI

EDENRED SA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (IT) 2(1)(2), MUMBAI

EDENRED SA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (IT) 2(1)(2), MUMBAI

EDENRED SA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (IT) 2(2)(1), MUMBAI

M/S GOOGLE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DY. D.I.T., BANGALORE

M/S GOOGLE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DY. D.I.T., BANGALORE

M/S GOOGLE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DY. D.I.T., BANGALORE

M/S GOOGLE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DY. D.I.T., BANGALORE

M/S. ARIBA INC.,GURGAON vs. ADIT, NEW DELHI

M/S. ARIBA INC.,GURGAON vs. ADIT, NEW DELHI