Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence (P) Ltd. v. CIT

432 ITR 471Supreme Court of India2021#50 most cited

What is Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence (P) Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Payments for the supply or use of computer software, where there is no transfer of copyright but only a right to use the copyrighted product, are generally considered business profits and not 'royalty' or 'fees for technical services' under the Income Tax Act, 1961 or relevant DTAAs. This principle also applies to transponder fees, which are not taxable as royalty.

914

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence · computer software royalty · section 9(1)(vi) · DTAA · fees for technical services · copyright transfer · copyrighted article · withholding tax · business profits · section 195 · transponder fees · taxability in India

Also reported as

125 Taxmann.com 42281 Taxmann 19

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 1961Section 9(1)(vi)Section 234BSection 195Section 90Section 144C(13)Section 9(1)(vii)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

copyrighted articlesection 14(a)section 9(1)(vi)make available clausecomputer softwaresection 195(2)section 90(2)royalty incomewithholding taxforeign tax creditfees for included servicestax treaty

Judgments citing Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence (P) Ltd. v. CIT

World Courier India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal for AY 2014-15 is treated as allowed for statistical purpose while the appeal for AY 2012-13 is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1727/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Aug 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri. Bharath H. B, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Kannan Narayanan, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 195Section 40a

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.1727, 1577/Bang/2017 Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2014-15 M/s. World Courier (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of No.1183A, Savipraja Enclave, Income Tax, 5th Cross, 9th Main, 4th Block, Circle – 7(1)(2), HBR Layout, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 043. PAN: AAACW 3078 K APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. Bharath H. B, CA Revenue by : Shri. Kannan Narayanan, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 09.08.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 11.08.202…

World Courier (India) Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal for AY 2014-15 is treated as allowed for statistical purpose while the appeal for AY 2012-13 is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1577/BANG/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Aug 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri. Bharath H. B, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Kannan Narayanan, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 195Section 40a

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.1727, 1577/Bang/2017 Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2014-15 M/s. World Courier (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of No.1183A, Savipraja Enclave, Income Tax, 5th Cross, 9th Main, 4th Block, Circle – 7(1)(2), HBR Layout, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 043. PAN: AAACW 3078 K APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. Bharath H. B, CA Revenue by : Shri. Kannan Narayanan, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 09.08.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 11.08.202…

M/S. Autodesk Asia Pte Limited, Singapore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation), Circle - 1(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1274/BANG/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Aug 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B R Baskaranit(It)A No.1274/Bang/2019 Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Autodesk Asia Pte. Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of 3, Fusionopolis Way 10/21 Symbiosis, Income Tax (International Taxation), Singapore, Foreign, Singapore. Circle – 1(1), Pan: Aafca 6398 D Bengaluru. Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. T. Suryanarayana, Advocate Revenue By : Ms. Neera Malhotra, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 05.08.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.08.2021 O R D E R Per N.V. Vasudevan: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 24.04.2019 Passed By The Acit (International Taxation), Circle -1(1), Bengaluru, Under Section 143(3) Read With Section 144C Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act), In Relation To Ay 2016-17. 2. The Assessee Is A Company Incorporated In Singapore & Is A Tax Resident Of Singapore In Terms Of The India Singapore Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (Dtaa). The Assessee Is Engaged In The Business Of Distribution Of Computer Software & Providing Ancillary Services In The Asia Pacific Region. During The Relevant Previous Year, The Assessee Sold

For Appellant: Shri. T. Suryanarayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 195Section 9(1)(vi)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI B R BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(IT)A No.1274/Bang/2019 Assessment year: 2016-17 M/s. Autodesk Asia Pte. Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of 3, Fusionopolis Way 10/21 Symbiosis, Income Tax (International Taxation), Singapore, Foreign, Singapore. Circle – 1(1), PAN: AAFCA 6398 D Bengaluru. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. T. Suryanarayana, Advocate Revenue by : Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 05.08.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 09.08.2021 O R D E R Per N.V. Va…

Nice Systems Technologies Inc., Usa vs. The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD) Circle-1(2)International Taxation, Bangalore

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

ITA 288/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Aug 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri Aliasgar Rampurawala, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 120(4)(b)Section 127Section 143(3)Section 144C

…appeal before the Tribunal. 8. The ld. AR submitted this issue is squarely covered by the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ENGINEERING ANALYSIS CENTRE FOR EXCELLENCE PRIVATE LIMITED VS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANOTHER – AIR 2021 SC 124 / 432 ITR 471 (SC). The Apex Court in the aforesaid case has held in paragraphs 27, 47, 52, 168 & 169 as under: “27. The machinery provision contained in Section 195 of the Income Tax Act is inextricably linked with the charging provision contained in Section 9 read with Section 4 of the Income Tax Act, as a result of which, a person resident in India, respon…

M/S Informatica Llc, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 2867/BANG/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Aug 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(Tp)A No.2867/Bang/2018 Assessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 195

…med by the learned Counsel for the parties stands concluded on account of the judgment delivered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ENGINEERING ANALYSIS CENTRE FOR EXCELLENCE PRIVATE LIMITED VS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANOTHER – AIR 2021 SC 124 / 432 ITR 471 (SC). The Apex Court in the aforesaid case has held in paragraphs 27, 47, 52, 168 & 169 as under: IT(TP)A No.2867/Bang/2018 M/s. Informatica LLC, Bangalore Page 4 of 6 “27. The machinery provision contained in Section 195 of the Income Tax Act is inextricably linked with the charging provision contained in Section 9 read with Section 4 of the…

Ibm India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

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

ITA 372/BANG/2016[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Aug 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm It(It)A No.371/Bang/2016 : Asst.Year 2014-2015 It(It)A No.372/Bang/2016 : Asst.Year 2014-2015 M/S.Ibm India Private Limited The Dy.Commissioner Of No.12, Subramanya Arcade Income-Tax, International V. Bannerghatta Main Road Taxation, Circle (1) Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 029. Pan : Aaaci4403L. (Appellant) (Respondent) O R D E R Per George George K, Jm This Application U/S 158A(5) Of The Income-Tax Act Seeks To Amend The Order Of The Itat Passed In It(It)A No.371/Bang/2016 & It(It)A No.372/Bang/2016. The Above Appeals Were Disposed Of By The Itat Vide Its Order Dated 16.06.2017. 2. During The Course Of Hearing Of The Above Appeals On 13.06.2017, The Learned Ar Submitted That The Grounds Taken In The Appeals Were Covered Against The Assessee By The Judgment Of The Hon’Ble Karnataka High Court In Assessee’S Own Case In Ita No.280 Of 2005. It Was Further Submitted By The Learned Ar That Against The Said Judgment Of The Hon’Ble Karnataka High Court, The Assessee Has Filed Slp Before The Hon’Ble Apex Court Vide Slp No.396 Of 2012 / Civil Appeal No.4419 Of 2012, Which Was Pending Adjudication. The Assessee Had Accordingly Filed A Declaration In Form No.8 U/S 158A(1) Of The I.T.Act (For Avoiding Repetitive Appeals) Read With Rule 16 Of The Income Tax Rules, 1962, For The Year Under Consideration, Submitting That Identical Question Of Law

Section 158A(1)Section 158A(5)Section 195Section 9(1)(vi)

…g before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 4. By this application u/s 158A(5) of the I.T.Act, it is submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide its judgment dated 2nd March, 2021 in the case of Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence Private Limited reported in 432 ITR 471 had overruled the judgment of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court and decided the issue in favour of the assessee. Therefore, it was submitted that as per section 158A(5) of the I.T.Act, the ITAT is required to amend the order passed by it in IT(IT)A Nos.371/Bang/2016 & 372/Bang/2016 in conformity with the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court.…

Ibm India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

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

ITA 371/BANG/2016[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Aug 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm It(It)A No.371/Bang/2016 : Asst.Year 2014-2015 It(It)A No.372/Bang/2016 : Asst.Year 2014-2015 M/S.Ibm India Private Limited The Dy.Commissioner Of No.12, Subramanya Arcade Income-Tax, International V. Bannerghatta Main Road Taxation, Circle (1) Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 029. Pan : Aaaci4403L. (Appellant) (Respondent) O R D E R Per George George K, Jm This Application U/S 158A(5) Of The Income-Tax Act Seeks To Amend The Order Of The Itat Passed In It(It)A No.371/Bang/2016 & It(It)A No.372/Bang/2016. The Above Appeals Were Disposed Of By The Itat Vide Its Order Dated 16.06.2017. 2. During The Course Of Hearing Of The Above Appeals On 13.06.2017, The Learned Ar Submitted That The Grounds Taken In The Appeals Were Covered Against The Assessee By The Judgment Of The Hon’Ble Karnataka High Court In Assessee’S Own Case In Ita No.280 Of 2005. It Was Further Submitted By The Learned Ar That Against The Said Judgment Of The Hon’Ble Karnataka High Court, The Assessee Has Filed Slp Before The Hon’Ble Apex Court Vide Slp No.396 Of 2012 / Civil Appeal No.4419 Of 2012, Which Was Pending Adjudication. The Assessee Had Accordingly Filed A Declaration In Form No.8 U/S 158A(1) Of The I.T.Act (For Avoiding Repetitive Appeals) Read With Rule 16 Of The Income Tax Rules, 1962, For The Year Under Consideration, Submitting That Identical Question Of Law

Section 158A(1)Section 158A(5)Section 195Section 9(1)(vi)

…g before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 4. By this application u/s 158A(5) of the I.T.Act, it is submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide its judgment dated 2nd March, 2021 in the case of Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence Private Limited reported in 432 ITR 471 had overruled the judgment of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court and decided the issue in favour of the assessee. Therefore, it was submitted that as per section 158A(5) of the I.T.Act, the ITAT is required to amend the order passed by it in IT(IT)A Nos.371/Bang/2016 & 372/Bang/2016 in conformity with the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court.…

Ibm India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

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

ITA 370/BANG/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Aug 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm It(It)A No.369/Bang/2016 : Asst.Year 2013-2014 It(It)A No.370/Bang/2016 : Asst.Year 2013-2014 M/S.Ibm India Private Limited The Dy.Commissioner Of No.12, Subramanya Arcade Income-Tax, International V. Bannerghatta Main Road Taxation, Circle (1) Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 029. Pan : Aaaci4403L. (Appellant) (Respondent) O R D E R Per George George K, Jm This Application U/S 158A(5) Of The Income-Tax Act Seeks To Amend The Order Of The Itat Passed In It(It)A No.369/Bang/2016 & It(It)A No.370/Bang/2016. The Above Appeals Were Disposed Of By The Itat Vide Its Order Dated 16.06.2017. 2. During The Course Of Hearing Of The Above Appeals On 13.06.2017, The Learned Ar Submitted That The Grounds Taken In The Appeals Were Covered Against The Assessee By The Judgment Of The Hon’Ble Karnataka High Court In Assessee’S Own Case In Ita No.280 Of 2005. It Was Further Submitted By The Learned Ar That Against The Said Judgment Of The Hon’Ble Karnataka High Court, The Assessee Has Filed Slp Before The Hon’Ble Apex Court Vide Slp No.396 Of 2012 / Civil Appeal No.4419 Of 2012, Which Was Pending Adjudication. The Assessee Had Accordingly Filed A Declaration In Form No.8 U/S 158A(1) Of The I.T.Act (For Avoiding Repetitive Appeals) Read With Rule 16 Of The Income Tax Rules, 1962, For The Year Under Consideration, Submitting That Identical Question Of Law

Section 158A(1)Section 158A(5)Section 195Section 9(1)(vi)

…g before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 4. By this application u/s 158A(5) of the I.T.Act, it is submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide its judgment dated 2nd March, 2021 in the case of Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence Private Limited reported in 432 ITR 471 had overruled the judgment of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court and decided the issue in favour of the assessee. Therefore, it was submitted that as per section 158A(5) of the I.T.Act, the ITAT is required to amend the order passed by it in IT(IT)A Nos.369/Bang/2016 & 370/Bang/2016 in conformity with the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court.…

M/S the Raddi Sahakara Bank Niyamitha, Dharwad vs. Income Tax Officer, Hubli

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

ITA 369/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Aug 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm It(It)A No.369/Bang/2016 : Asst.Year 2013-2014 It(It)A No.370/Bang/2016 : Asst.Year 2013-2014 M/S.Ibm India Private Limited The Dy.Commissioner Of No.12, Subramanya Arcade Income-Tax, International V. Bannerghatta Main Road Taxation, Circle (1) Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 029. Pan : Aaaci4403L. (Appellant) (Respondent) O R D E R Per George George K, Jm This Application U/S 158A(5) Of The Income-Tax Act Seeks To Amend The Order Of The Itat Passed In It(It)A No.369/Bang/2016 & It(It)A No.370/Bang/2016. The Above Appeals Were Disposed Of By The Itat Vide Its Order Dated 16.06.2017. 2. During The Course Of Hearing Of The Above Appeals On 13.06.2017, The Learned Ar Submitted That The Grounds Taken In The Appeals Were Covered Against The Assessee By The Judgment Of The Hon’Ble Karnataka High Court In Assessee’S Own Case In Ita No.280 Of 2005. It Was Further Submitted By The Learned Ar That Against The Said Judgment Of The Hon’Ble Karnataka High Court, The Assessee Has Filed Slp Before The Hon’Ble Apex Court Vide Slp No.396 Of 2012 / Civil Appeal No.4419 Of 2012, Which Was Pending Adjudication. The Assessee Had Accordingly Filed A Declaration In Form No.8 U/S 158A(1) Of The I.T.Act (For Avoiding Repetitive Appeals) Read With Rule 16 Of The Income Tax Rules, 1962, For The Year Under Consideration, Submitting That Identical Question Of Law

Section 158A(1)Section 158A(5)Section 195Section 9(1)(vi)

…g before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 4. By this application u/s 158A(5) of the I.T.Act, it is submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide its judgment dated 2nd March, 2021 in the case of Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence Private Limited reported in 432 ITR 471 had overruled the judgment of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court and decided the issue in favour of the assessee. Therefore, it was submitted that as per section 158A(5) of the I.T.Act, the ITAT is required to amend the order passed by it in IT(IT)A Nos.369/Bang/2016 & 370/Bang/2016 in conformity with the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court.…

Autodesk Asia Pte Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

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

ITA 293/BANG/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Aug 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm It(Tp)A No.293/Bang/2015: Asst.Year 2006-2007 M/S.Autodesk Asia Pte Limited The Dy.Commissioner Of 3, Fusionopolis Way Income-Tax (International V. #10-21 Symbiosis Taxation), Circle 1(1) Singapore – 138 633. Bangalore. Pan : Aafca6398D. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Miss.Mansa Ananthan, Advocate Respondent By : Sri.Pradeep Kumar, Cit-Dr Date Of Pronouncement : 05.08.2021 Date Of Hearing : 05.08.2021 O R D E R Per George George K, Jm This Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against Final Assessment Order Dated 27.01.2015, Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 R.W.S. 144C Of The I.T.Act. The Relevant Assessment Year Is 2006-2007. 2. The Solitary Issue Raised Is Whether Sale Of Software Was Liable To Be Taxed As Royalty.

For Appellant: Miss.Mansa Ananthan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Pradeep Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 9(1)(vi)

…outset, the learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the issue in question is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence P.Ltd. v. CIT reported in [2021] 432 ITR 471 (SC). The learned Departmental Representative was not able to controvert the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the assessee. In view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court, which is identical to the facts of this case, we hold that the payment of US$ 2,06,52,308 received by the assessee-company would not constitute royalty and cannot…

Wipro Limited vs. The Additional Commissioner of Income Tax

The appeal is allowed

ITA/724/2019HC Karnataka03 Aug 2021

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,R. NATARAJ

Section 195Section 201(1)Section 260ASection 9(1)(vi)

…h, learned Senior Counsel for the appellant has argued before this Court that the issue involved in the present case is no longer res integra and the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence v. CIT, reported in (2021) 432 ITR 471 has decided the issue. 8. The operative paragraph of the judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence (supra) reads as under;- "Conclusion 168. Given the definition of royalties contained in Article 12 of the DTAAs mentioned in paragraph 41 of this judgment, it is clear…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation) -1 vs. Alcatel Lucent France (Now Known As Alcatel Lucent Intl.)

Accordingly, the present batch of matters is dismissed

ITA-145/2020HC Delhi29 Jul 2021
Section 195Section 234BSection 260ASection 9

…n 234B of the Income Tax Act, 1961?” 3. Admittedly, the first proposed question is covered against the Revenue by virtue of the Supreme Court judgement in Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence Pvt. Ltd. V. Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. [2021] 432 ITR 471 (SC). 4. Even the aforesaid second proposed question is covered against the Revenue by virtue of the judgment of this Court in DIT v. GE Packaged 2021:DHC:2232-DB ITA 145/2021 and connected matters Page 3 of 3 Power Inc. [2015] 373 ITR 65 (Del). 5. Consequently, no substantial question of law arises in the present batch of ma…

Taxation) -1 vs. Lucent Intl.)

Accordingly, the present batch of matters is dismissed

ITA/151/2020HC Delhi29 Jul 2021
Section 195Section 234BSection 260ASection 9

…n 234B of the Income Tax Act, 1961?” 3. Admittedly, the first proposed question is covered against the Revenue by virtue of the Supreme Court judgement in Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence Pvt. Ltd. V. Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. [2021] 432 ITR 471 (SC). 4. Even the aforesaid second proposed question is covered against the Revenue by virtue of the judgment of this Court in DIT v. GE Packaged 2021:DHC:2232-DB ITA 145/2021 and connected matters Page 3 of 3 Power Inc. [2015] 373 ITR 65 (Del). 5. Consequently, no substantial question of law arises in the present batch of ma…

Taxation) -1 vs. Lucent Intl.)

Accordingly, the present batch of matters is dismissed

ITA/149/2020HC Delhi29 Jul 2021
Section 195Section 234BSection 260ASection 9

…n 234B of the Income Tax Act, 1961?” 3. Admittedly, the first proposed question is covered against the Revenue by virtue of the Supreme Court judgement in Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence Pvt. Ltd. V. Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. [2021] 432 ITR 471 (SC). 4. Even the aforesaid second proposed question is covered against the Revenue by virtue of the judgment of this Court in DIT v. GE Packaged 2021:DHC:2232-DB ITA 145/2021 and connected matters Page 3 of 3 Power Inc. [2015] 373 ITR 65 (Del). 5. Consequently, no substantial question of law arises in the present batch of ma…

Taxation) -1 vs. Lucent Intl.)

Accordingly, the present batch of matters is dismissed

ITA/145/2020HC Delhi29 Jul 2021
Section 195Section 234BSection 260ASection 9

…n 234B of the Income Tax Act, 1961?” 3. Admittedly, the first proposed question is covered against the Revenue by virtue of the Supreme Court judgement in Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence Pvt. Ltd. V. Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. [2021] 432 ITR 471 (SC). 4. Even the aforesaid second proposed question is covered against the Revenue by virtue of the judgment of this Court in DIT v. GE Packaged 2021:DHC:2232-DB ITA 145/2021 and connected matters Page 3 of 3 Power Inc. [2015] 373 ITR 65 (Del). 5. Consequently, no substantial question of law arises in the present batch of ma…

ACIT(International Taxation) Circle-1(2)(2), New Delhi vs. Digital Route Ab, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2905/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jul 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri O.P. Kant[Through Video Conferencing] Assessment Year: 2013-14

Section 9

…ly decisions relied upon. 5. The Ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that issue in dispute is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence (P) Ltd vs CIT reported in 432 ITR 471 (SC). The Ld. DR also conceded that issue in dispute of supply of the software is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 6. We have heard rival submission of the parties on the issue in dispute. In the case, the issue in dispute is whether the supply of the software by the assessee company is taxable as ro…

M/S. Quest Software International Limited, Ireland vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation), Circle- 2(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 2531/BANG/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Jul 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm It(It)A No.2531/Bang/2019: Asst.Year 2016-2017 M/S.Quest Software International The Dy.Commissioner Of Limited, 6Th Floor, South Bank Income-Tax (International V. House, Barrow Street, Dublin Taxation) Circle 2(1) Foreign Ireland. Bangalore. Pan : Aaacq2102L. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Miss.Mansa Ananthan, Advocate Respondent By : Sri.Pradeep Kumar, Cit-Dr Date Of Pronouncement : 27.07.2021 Date Of Hearing : 27.07.2021 O R D E R Per George George K, Jm This Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against Final Assessment Order Dated 21.10.2016, Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The I.T.Act. The Relevant Assessment Year Is 2016-2017. 2. The Solitary Issue Raised Is Whether Sale Of Software Was Liable To Be Taxed As Royalty.

For Appellant: Miss.Mansa Ananthan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Pradeep Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 9(1)(vi)

…outset, the learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the issue in question is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence P.Ltd. v. CIT reported in [2021] 432 ITR 471 (SC). The learned Departmental Representative was not able to controvert the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the assessee. In view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court, which is identical to the facts of this case, we hold that the payment of Rs.42,96,49,035 received by the assessee-company would not constitute royalty and cannot…

M/S. Samsung R & D Institute India _ Bangalore Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, (International Taxation), Circle -2(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 2656/BANG/2019[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Jul 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kannan Narayanan, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195(2)Section 2Section 201Section 248Section 250Section 4Section 9

…he material on record. The issue in dispute in all these appeals is issue is settled by the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ENGINEERING ANALYSIS CENTRE FOR EXCELLENCE PRIVATE LIMITED VS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANOTHER – AIR 2021 SC 124 / 432 ITR 471 (SC). The Apex Court in the aforesaid case has held in paragraphs 27, 47, 52, 168 & 169 as under: “27. The machinery provision contained in Section 195 of the Income Tax Act is inextricably linked with the charging provision contained in Section 9 read with Section 4 of the Income Tax Act, as a result of which, a person resident in India, respon…

M/S. Samsung R & D Institute India- Bangalore Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, (International Taxation), Circle -2(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 2655/BANG/2019[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Jul 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kannan Narayanan, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195(2)Section 2Section 201Section 248Section 250Section 4Section 9

…he material on record. The issue in dispute in all these appeals is issue is settled by the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ENGINEERING ANALYSIS CENTRE FOR EXCELLENCE PRIVATE LIMITED VS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANOTHER – AIR 2021 SC 124 / 432 ITR 471 (SC). The Apex Court in the aforesaid case has held in paragraphs 27, 47, 52, 168 & 169 as under: “27. The machinery provision contained in Section 195 of the Income Tax Act is inextricably linked with the charging provision contained in Section 9 read with Section 4 of the Income Tax Act, as a result of which, a person resident in India, respon…

M/S. Samsung R & D Institute India - Bangalore Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, (International Taxation), Circle -2(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 2654/BANG/2019[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Jul 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kannan Narayanan, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195(2)Section 2Section 201Section 248Section 250Section 4Section 9

…he material on record. The issue in dispute in all these appeals is issue is settled by the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ENGINEERING ANALYSIS CENTRE FOR EXCELLENCE PRIVATE LIMITED VS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANOTHER – AIR 2021 SC 124 / 432 ITR 471 (SC). The Apex Court in the aforesaid case has held in paragraphs 27, 47, 52, 168 & 169 as under: “27. The machinery provision contained in Section 195 of the Income Tax Act is inextricably linked with the charging provision contained in Section 9 read with Section 4 of the Income Tax Act, as a result of which, a person resident in India, respon…