DIT v. Nokia Networks OY

358 ITR 259High Court2013#287 most cited

What is DIT v. Nokia Networks OY authority for?

Payments for the supply of software along with telecom equipment are not in the nature of royalty if they are for the use of a copyrighted article, not the copyright itself. Such payments are not taxable in India in the absence of a Permanent Establishment (PE).

276

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

DIT v. Nokia Networks OY · Nokia Networks OY · Section 9(1)(vi) · Section 195 · software payments · royalty income · fees for technical services · copyrighted article vs copyright · Permanent Establishment · DTAA · make available clause

Also reported as

212 Taxmann 6825 Taxmann.com 225253 CTR 417

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 143(3)Section 9(1)(vi)Section 144C(13)Section 234BSection 195Section 9(1)(vii)Section 270A

Issues it is cited on

section 9(1)(v)section 9(2)make available clausecopyrighted articlesection 44bbsection 44bsection 90(2)fees for included servicessection 9(1)(vi)fees for technical servicescomputer softwaresection 9(1)(vii)

Judgments citing DIT v. Nokia Networks OY

Addl. CIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sunbeam Auto Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 5127/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Apr 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Dble & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year: 2011-12 Sunbeam Auto Ltd. Vs. Addl. Cit, S-323, Panchsheel Park, Range-9, New Delhi 110 017 New Delhi. Pan Aabcs2948F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Addl. Cit Vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd. Special Range-8, S-323, Panchsheel Park, Room No. 199A, New Delhi 110 017 C.R. Building, Pan Aabcs2948F New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sunbeam Auto Ltd. Vs. Dcit, S-323, Panchsheel Park, Circle-24(2) New Delhi 110 017 New Delhi. Pan Aabcs2948F (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Shashi M Kapila, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Umesh Takyar, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 264Section 37(1)Section 40Section 43(1)

…ed in Article 12 of DTAA with Japan. In order to overcome the judgment (supra) an explanation below section 9(2) was introduced by the Finance Act, 2010 retrospectively. Referring to the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in DIT vs. Nokia Networks OY (2013) 358 ITR 259 (Del), the Ld. AR submitted that the amendment cannot be read into the DTAA. He also referred to the decision of Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in IHI Corporation vs. Addl. DIT (Int. taxation) (2013) 32 taxmann.Com 132 (Mumbai Trib.) wherein the Tribunal held that in view of the amendment to the relevant provisions by means of the substitution of E…

Sunbeam Auto Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 4378/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Apr 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Dble & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year: 2011-12 Sunbeam Auto Ltd. Vs. Addl. Cit, S-323, Panchsheel Park, Range-9, New Delhi 110 017 New Delhi. Pan Aabcs2948F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Addl. Cit Vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd. Special Range-8, S-323, Panchsheel Park, Room No. 199A, New Delhi 110 017 C.R. Building, Pan Aabcs2948F New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sunbeam Auto Ltd. Vs. Dcit, S-323, Panchsheel Park, Circle-24(2) New Delhi 110 017 New Delhi. Pan Aabcs2948F (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Shashi M Kapila, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Umesh Takyar, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 264Section 37(1)Section 40Section 43(1)

…ed in Article 12 of DTAA with Japan. In order to overcome the judgment (supra) an explanation below section 9(2) was introduced by the Finance Act, 2010 retrospectively. Referring to the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in DIT vs. Nokia Networks OY (2013) 358 ITR 259 (Del), the Ld. AR submitted that the amendment cannot be read into the DTAA. He also referred to the decision of Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in IHI Corporation vs. Addl. DIT (Int. taxation) (2013) 32 taxmann.Com 132 (Mumbai Trib.) wherein the Tribunal held that in view of the amendment to the relevant provisions by means of the substitution of E…

Relx Inc, Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle Int Tax 3(1)(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1877/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.I.T.A. No. 1877/Del/2022 (A.Y 2018-19)

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Sharma, Adv.; &For Respondent: Shri Anshuman Pattnaik
Section 270ASection 9(1)(vii)

…for the use of copyrighted material rather than for the use of copyright. The distinction between the copyright and copyrighted article has been very well pointed out by the decisions of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of DIT v. Nokia Networks OY [2013] 358 ITR 259/212 Taxman 68/25 taxmann.com 225. In this case all that the assessee gets right is to access the copyrighted material and there is no dispute about. As a matter of fact, the AO righty noted that 'royalty' has been defined as "payment of any kind received as a consideration for the use of, or right to use of, any copyright of literary, artistic or…

Relx Inc, Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle Int Tax 3(1)(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1876/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Apr 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.I.T.A. No. 1877/Del/2022 (A.Y 2018-19)

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Sharma, Adv.; &For Respondent: Shri Anshuman Pattnaik
Section 270ASection 9(1)(vii)

…for the use of copyrighted material rather than for the use of copyright. The distinction between the copyright and copyrighted article has been very well pointed out by the decisions of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of DIT v. Nokia Networks OY [2013] 358 ITR 259/212 Taxman 68/25 taxmann.com 225. In this case all that the assessee gets right is to access the copyrighted material and there is no dispute about. As a matter of fact, the AO righty noted that 'royalty' has been defined as "payment of any kind received as a consideration for the use of, or right to use of, any copyright of literary, artistic or…

ACIT(It), Circle - 1(2), Kolkata vs. M/S. Ixia Technologies International Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed”

ITA 6/KOL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 6/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax(It)...Appellant Circle-1(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawanpoorva, 110, Shantipally, Kolkata-700107 -Vs.- Ixia Technologies International Limited,..Respondent Plot No. Y-14, Block-Ep, Sector-V, Salt Lake Electronics Complex, Bidhan Nagar, Kolkata-700091 [Pan: Aacci3401L] Appearances By: Shri Amal Kamat, Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Shri Rahul Saha, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee

Section 250Section 9(1)(vi)

…the effect of insertion of Explanation 4 in the definition of "Royalty" in Sec.9(1)(vi) of the Act by the Finance Act, 2012, w.e.f. 1-6-1976. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of "DIT v Nokia Networks OY" [2012] 25 taxmann.com 225/[2013] 212 Taxman 68/358 ITR 259 has held that though 'Explanation 4' was added to section 9(1)(vi) by the Finance Act2012 with retrospective effect from 1.6.1976 to provide that all consideration for user of software shall be assessable as "royalty", the definition in the DTAA has been left unchanged. That in CIT v."SiemensAktiongesellschaft [2009] 310 ITR 320/177 Taxman 81 (Bo…

Preludesys India Pvt Ltd, Kanchipuram vs. DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeals of the Assessee in I

ITA 76/CHNY/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Shri Sonjoy Sarmaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A Nos.:75 & 76/Chny/2021 िनधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Years: 2018–19 & 2019-20 M/S. Preludesys India Private Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of Old No.D-12, New No.3/A3, Vs. Income Tax, First Cross Road, Centralized Processing Center Kelambakkam, [Cpc], Kancheepuram – 603 103.T.N Income Tax Department, Bengaluru – 560 500 Pan : Aabcp 7252K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Mr. B. Ramakrishnan, Fca ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Mr. Arv Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 18.08.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.08.2022

For Appellant: Mr. B. Ramakrishnan, FCAFor Respondent: Mr. ARV Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)Section 234BSection 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 9

…or the use of copyrighted material rather than for the use of copyright. The distinction between the copyright and copyrighted article has been very well pointed out by the decisions of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of DIT Vs Nokia Networks OY [(20113) 358 ITR 259 (Del)]. In this case all that the assessee gets right is to access the copyrighted material and there is no dispute about. As a matter of fact, the AO righty noted that 'royalty' has been defined as "payment of any kind received as a consideration for the use of, or right to use of, any copyright of literary, artistic or scientific work" and that…

Preludesys India Pvt Ltd, Kanchipuram vs. DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeals of the Assessee in I

ITA 75/CHNY/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Shri Sonjoy Sarmaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A Nos.:75 & 76/Chny/2021 िनधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Years: 2018–19 & 2019-20 M/S. Preludesys India Private Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of Old No.D-12, New No.3/A3, Vs. Income Tax, First Cross Road, Centralized Processing Center Kelambakkam, [Cpc], Kancheepuram – 603 103.T.N Income Tax Department, Bengaluru – 560 500 Pan : Aabcp 7252K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Mr. B. Ramakrishnan, Fca ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Mr. Arv Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 18.08.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.08.2022

For Appellant: Mr. B. Ramakrishnan, FCAFor Respondent: Mr. ARV Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)Section 234BSection 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 9

…or the use of copyrighted material rather than for the use of copyright. The distinction between the copyright and copyrighted article has been very well pointed out by the decisions of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of DIT Vs Nokia Networks OY [(20113) 358 ITR 259 (Del)]. In this case all that the assessee gets right is to access the copyrighted material and there is no dispute about. As a matter of fact, the AO righty noted that 'royalty' has been defined as "payment of any kind received as a consideration for the use of, or right to use of, any copyright of literary, artistic or scientific work" and that…

Immarsat Global Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 2(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result the issue under consideration is remitted back to the file of Assessing Officer for statistical purpose and ground raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 626/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleinmarsat Global Limited V. Dcit (It) – 2(2)(1) Ernst & Young Llp Room No. 1722, 17Th Floor 14Th Floor, The Ruby Air India Building, Nariman Point 29 Senapati Bapat Marg Mumbai – 400021 Dadar (W), Mumbai – 400028 Pan: Aaaci6098K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Aarati Sathe Department By : Ms. Bharati Singh

For Appellant: Ms. Aarati SatheFor Respondent: Ms. Bharati Singh
Section 143(2)Section 144C(5)

…nd the issue which was posed before different forums for consideration and find that it has been consistently held relying upon the decisions of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the cases of New Skies Satellite(2016) 382 ITR 1, DIT vs. Nokia Networks OY (2013) 358 ITR 259 and Asia Satellite Communications Co. Ltd. (supra) in the decisions of Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc. dated 25.04.2007 in ITA Nos. 7299 & 7300/ Mum/2010 for A.Y. 2005- 06 and 2007-08, DDIT vs. Shell Information Technology International BV dated 15.03.2017 in ITA No. 5051/Mum/ 2009 20 Inmarsat Global Limited & Others for A.Y. 2006-07 to 2008-09 and ADIT…

Nortonlifelock Singapore Pte Ltd (Earlier Known As Symantec Asia Pacific Pte Ltd), Singapore vs. DCIT Circle-3(1)(2) Int, Tax., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 8282/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Years 2015-16 Acit 3(1)(2) Vs. Symantec Asia Pacific (International Taxation) Pte. Ltd., New Delhi. 8, Marine Boulevard, Marina Financial Centre, Singapore Pan Aaocs1828F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year 2015-16 Nortonlifelock Singapore Pte Vs. Dcit Circle- Ltd. (Earlier Known As Symantec 3(1)(2) Int. Tax., Asia Pacific Pte. Ltd.), New Delhi One Raffles Place Mall,#02-01, Room 308, Singapore 048616 (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 9

…raised in the decision of Hon’ble High Court in Infrasoft Ltd. (supra) and sister concern of the assessee in Symantec Corporation (supra) and also in the case of the Nagravision S.A. (supra). The Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in DIT vs Nokia Networks OY [2013] 358 ITR 259 (Delhi) had held that Explanation 4 was added to section 9(1)(vi) of the Act by the Finance Act, 2012 with retrospective effect from 01.06.1976 to provide that all consideration for use of software shall be assessable as “Royalty”. However, the definition in the DTAA has been left unchanged. It is an admitted fact that though Explanation 5 has be…

ACIT 3(1)(2)(International Taxation), New Delhi vs. Symantec Asia Pacific Pte Ltd., Singapore

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7749/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Years 2015-16 Acit 3(1)(2) Vs. Symantec Asia Pacific (International Taxation) Pte. Ltd., New Delhi. 8, Marine Boulevard, Marina Financial Centre, Singapore Pan Aaocs1828F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year 2015-16 Nortonlifelock Singapore Pte Vs. Dcit Circle- Ltd. (Earlier Known As Symantec 3(1)(2) Int. Tax., Asia Pacific Pte. Ltd.), New Delhi One Raffles Place Mall,#02-01, Room 308, Singapore 048616 (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 9

…raised in the decision of Hon’ble High Court in Infrasoft Ltd. (supra) and sister concern of the assessee in Symantec Corporation (supra) and also in the case of the Nagravision S.A. (supra). The Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in DIT vs Nokia Networks OY [2013] 358 ITR 259 (Delhi) had held that Explanation 4 was added to section 9(1)(vi) of the Act by the Finance Act, 2012 with retrospective effect from 01.06.1976 to provide that all consideration for use of software shall be assessable as “Royalty”. However, the definition in the DTAA has been left unchanged. It is an admitted fact that though Explanation 5 has be…

The Dy.Citi -Cir 3(3) (2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Park Air Systems Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2362/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Ashish K. Gupta, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Milind Chavan, Sr. DR
Section 250Section 9(1)(vi)

…used independently. This software merely facilitates the functioning of the equipment and is an integral part thereof.” 12. The aforesaid decision in Ericsson AB (supra) was subsequently followed by Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in DIT vs Nokia Networks OY [2013] 358 ITR 259 (Delhi) and CIT vs ZTE Corporation [2017] 392 ITR 80 (Delhi). All these decisions rendered by Hon‟ble Delhi High Court came up for consideration before Hon‟ble Supreme Court in Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence Pvt. Ltd. (supra). In which case, after noting the relevant findings rendered by Hon‟ble Delhi High Court, at Para 110 to 116 of…

Immarsat Global Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT (International Taxation) Range-2(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1031/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2022AY 2017-18
Section 143(3)Section 9(1)(vi)

…nd the issue which was posed before different forums for consideration and find that it has been consistently held relying upon the decisions of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the cases of New Skies Satellite(2016) 382 ITR 1, DIT vs. Nokia Networks OY (2013) 358 ITR 259 and Asia Satellite Communications Co. Ltd. (supra) in the decisions of Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc. dated 25.04.2007 in ITA Nos. 7299 & 7300/ Mum/2010 for A.Y. 2005-06 and 2007-08, DDIT vs. Shell Information Technology International BV dated 15.03.2017 in ITA No. 5051/Mum/ 2009 & Others for A.Y. 2006-07 to 2008-09 and ADIT vs. Taj TV Ltd. dated 05.07.…

Tibco Software Bv, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, (It), Circle-2, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1348/PUN/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri Somil AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Deepak Garg
Section 144C(13)Section 234BSection 274

…use and it was a contract for supply of goods. Therefore, no part of the payment therefore can be classified as payment towards royalty."(pages 501-502) 111. This judgment was followed in DIT v. Nokia Networks OY [2012] 25 taxmann.com 225/[2013] 212 Taxman 68/358 ITR 259 (Delhi) ["Nokia Networks OY"],41 with the High Court of Delhi, adverting, this time, to the further expanded definition of "royalty" that is contained in the retrospective amendment that inserted Explanation 4 to section 9(1)(vi) of the Income-tax Act. In this case, the High Court was concerned with the Agreement between the Republic of India and…

Tibco Software Bv, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, (International Taxation), Circle -2, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1554/PUN/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 May 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri Somil AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Deepak Garg
Section 144C(13)Section 234BSection 274

…use and it was a contract for supply of goods. Therefore, no part of the payment therefore can be classified as payment towards royalty."(pages 501-502) 111. This judgment was followed in DIT v. Nokia Networks OY [2012] 25 taxmann.com 225/[2013] 212 Taxman 68/358 ITR 259 (Delhi) ["Nokia Networks OY"],41 with the High Court of Delhi, adverting, this time, to the further expanded definition of "royalty" that is contained in the retrospective amendment that inserted Explanation 4 to section 9(1)(vi) of the Income-tax Act. In this case, the High Court was concerned with the Agreement between the Republic of India and…

Tata Consultancy Services Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Large Tax Payer Unit-1, Mumbai

797/Mum/2018

ITA 1769/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Apr 2022AY 2013-14
Section 143(3)Section 2Section 2(43)Section 37Section 40Section 90

…e meaning of article 12 of the DTA A or section 9(i)(vi) of the Act. DASSAULT SYSTEMS K. K., In re [70101 32 ITR 175 (AAR), GEOQUEST SSTEMS B. V., In re 120101 327 ITR 1 (AAR), DIT v. ERICSSON A. B. 120121 343 ITR 470 (Delhi), DIT v. Nokia NETWORKS OY [2013] 358 ITR 259 (Delhi), D1T V. INFRASOFT LTD. [2014] 3 ITR-OL 333 (Delhi) and CIT v. Z'I'E CORPORATION [2017] 392 ITR 80 (Delhi) approved. STATE BANK OF INDIA V. COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS (2000) 1 SCC 727 relied on. Royalty, under section 90)(vi) of the Act, means the transfer of all or any rights, including the g-ranting of a licence, in respect of any copyright i…

Tibco Software B.V., Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, (It), Circle - 2, Pune

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2979/PUN/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal & Sonjoy Sarma,Jm Assessment Year : 2014-15 Tibco Software B.V. ...... Appellant C/O Tibco Software India P.Ltd. 3 Floor, Binnarius,Deepak Complex, National Games Road, Shastri Nagar, Yerwada, Pune – 411 006. Pan : Aaect3252G V/S. Dcit(It),Circle-2, Pune ……Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Somil AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Rajiv Kumar
Section 144C(13)Section 274

…se and it was a contract for supply of goods. Therefore, no part of the payment therefore can be classified as payment towards royalty."(pages 501-502) 111. This judgment was followed in DIT v. Nokia Networks OY [2012] 25 taxmann.com 225/[2013] 212 Taxman 68/358 ITR 259 (Delhi) ["Nokia Networks OY"],41 with the High Court of Delhi, adverting, this time, to the further expanded definition of "royalty" that is contained in the retrospective amendment that inserted Explanation 4 to section 9(1)(vi) of the Income-tax Act. In this case, the High Court was concerned with the Agreement between the Republic of India and…

DCIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Int. Taxn., New Delhi vs. Alcatel Lucent International, France

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

ITA 715/DEL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

Section 9(1)(vi)Section 9(1)(vii)

…the cellular operator for acquiring such property cannot be regarded as a payment by way of royalty. 6. This Court also noticed that the ITAT had in addition relied upon other judgment of this Court i.e. Director of Income-tax Vs. Ms. Nokia Networks. (2013) 358 ITR 259 (Delhi). 7. In view of this settled position, this court is of the opinion that no substantial question of law arises. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. 9. This order of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi has been upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in a bunch of appeals in the case of Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence Private Ltd. Vide…

DCIT Circle-1(1)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi vs. Alcatel Lucent International, France

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

ITA 713/DEL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

Section 9(1)(vi)Section 9(1)(vii)

…the cellular operator for acquiring such property cannot be regarded as a payment by way of royalty. 6. This Court also noticed that the ITAT had in addition relied upon other judgment of this Court i.e. Director of Income-tax Vs. Ms. Nokia Networks. (2013) 358 ITR 259 (Delhi). 7. In view of this settled position, this court is of the opinion that no substantial question of law arises. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. 9. This order of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi has been upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in a bunch of appeals in the case of Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence Private Ltd. Vide…

M/S.Nds Limited, Bangalore vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

ITA 364/BANG/2017[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Dec 2021AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri. B.R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(It)A No. 364/Bang/2017 Assessment Year : 2007-08 M/S. Synamedia Ltd. [Formerly Known As ‘Nds Limited’], The Assistant C/O. M/S. Synamedia India Pvt. Commissioner Of Ltd., Income Tax, Block 9A & 9B, Pritech Park, International Survey No. 51-64/4, Taxation, Sarjapur Outer Ring Road, Vs. Circle – 1(2), Bellandur Village, Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 103. Pan: Aabcn2524L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sharath Rao, Advocate : Shri Dilip, Standing Revenue By Counsel For Dept. Date Of Hearing : 16-12-2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 28-12-2021

For Appellant: Shri
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234B

…pable of independent use and it was a contract for supply of goods. Therefore, no part of the payment therefore can be classified as payment towards royalty. (pages 501-502) 111.This judgment was followed in Director of Income Tax v. Nokia Networks OY, (2013) 358 ITR 259 [“Nokia Networks OY”],42 with the High Court of Delhi, adverting, this time, to the further expanded definition of “royalty” that is contained in the retrospective amendment that inserted explanation 4 to section 9(1)(vi) of the Income Tax Act. In this case, the High Court was concerned with the Agreement between the Republic of India and the Rep…

DCIT, Circle - 2 (1), Interntional Taxation, Chennai vs. M/S. Petrofac Engineering Services India Pvt. Ltd, Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for both

ITA 657/CHNY/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Dec 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.656 & 657/Chny/2020 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13) Vs M/S. Petrofac Engineering The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Services Pvt.Ltd. 7Th Floor, Block 9A Circle-2(1), International Taxation, Chennai. Dlf Infocity Sez 1/124 Shivaji Gardens, Nandambakkam Post Manapakkam, Chennai-600089. Pan: Aaecp 1211H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. Ashik Shah, C.A ""For Respondent: 08.12.2021
Section 195Section 201(1)Section 9

…In re [2010] 193 Taxnian 8 1/327 ITR 1 (AAR - New Delhi) and the judgments of the High Court of Delhi in DIT v. Ericsson A.B., [2011] 16 taxmann.com 371/[20l2] 204 Taxman 192/343 ITR 470, DIT v. Nokia Networks OY [2012] 25 taxmann.com 225/[2013] 212 Taxman 68/358 ITR 259 (Delhi) DIT v. Infrasoft Ltd. [2013] 39 taxmann.com 38/[2014] 220 Taxman 273 (Delhi) CIT v. ZTE Corporation [2017] 77 taxmann.com 304/245 Taxman 252/392 ITR 80 (Delhi) state the law correctly and have this Court’s express approval. [Para 118] • The language of section 14(b)(ii) of the Copyright Act makes it clear that it is the exclusive right o…