Gracemac v. DIT

42 SOT 550Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2010#6499 most cited
18

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2023.

Issues it is cited on

section 90(2)section 9(1)(vi)section 90section 9(1)non-residentdouble taxationtransferpersonsection 14indiabusiness

Judgments citing Gracemac v. DIT

TELEFONICA UK LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (INT TAX), RANGE-4(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, on this ground, appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed

ITA 772/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Us On Merits Is With Regard To Ground No.11-19 Which Releates To Cellular Roaming Charges & Treating The Amount Of Rs.7,45,72,450/- Taxable Under 9(1)(Vi) Of The Act & Also As Per India-Uk Dtaa Under Article 13(3). At The Outset, Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Submitted That This Issue Stands Covered In The Case Of M/S. Telefonica Depreciation Espana Sa Vs. Cit In Ita No.2657/Bang/2019, 180/Bang/2022& 817/Bang/2022 For The A.Yrs. 2010-11 To 2012-13. 3. The Brief Facts Are That Assessee, I.E., Telefonica Uk Ltd Is A Company Incorporated Under The Laws Of United Kingdom Of Great Britain & Northern Ireland (Uk) & Is A Tax Resident Of Uk. The Assessee Is A Non-Resident Telecommunication Service Provider, Primarily Engaged In The Business Of Providing Mobile & Broadband Services Along With Various Other Ancillary Services Such As Text, Media Messaging, Games, Music, Video & Data Connections In The United Kingdom.

Section 144Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘I‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.771/Mum/2023 & 772/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year :2014-15) M/s. Telefonica UK Limited Vs. Deputy Commissioner 16th Floor, The Ruby of Income Tax 29, Senapati Bapat Marg (International Dadar (W) Taxation)-4(1)(2) Mumbai Mumbai Maharashtra-400 028 PAN/GIR No.AAICT7347J (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Hiten Chande Revenue by Shri S Anbuselvam Date of Hearing 29/08/2023 Date of Pronouncement 22/09/2023 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA (J.M): In so far as appeals…

TELEFONICA UK LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (INT TAX), RANGE-4(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, on this ground, appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed

ITA 771/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Us On Merits Is With Regard To Ground No.11-19 Which Releates To Cellular Roaming Charges & Treating The Amount Of Rs.7,45,72,450/- Taxable Under 9(1)(Vi) Of The Act & Also As Per India-Uk Dtaa Under Article 13(3). At The Outset, Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Submitted That This Issue Stands Covered In The Case Of M/S. Telefonica Depreciation Espana Sa Vs. Cit In Ita No.2657/Bang/2019, 180/Bang/2022& 817/Bang/2022 For The A.Yrs. 2010-11 To 2012-13. 3. The Brief Facts Are That Assessee, I.E., Telefonica Uk Ltd Is A Company Incorporated Under The Laws Of United Kingdom Of Great Britain & Northern Ireland (Uk) & Is A Tax Resident Of Uk. The Assessee Is A Non-Resident Telecommunication Service Provider, Primarily Engaged In The Business Of Providing Mobile & Broadband Services Along With Various Other Ancillary Services Such As Text, Media Messaging, Games, Music, Video & Data Connections In The United Kingdom.

Section 144Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘I‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.771/Mum/2023 & 772/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year :2014-15) M/s. Telefonica UK Limited Vs. Deputy Commissioner 16th Floor, The Ruby of Income Tax 29, Senapati Bapat Marg (International Dadar (W) Taxation)-4(1)(2) Mumbai Mumbai Maharashtra-400 028 PAN/GIR No.AAICT7347J (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Hiten Chande Revenue by Shri S Anbuselvam Date of Hearing 29/08/2023 Date of Pronouncement 22/09/2023 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA (J.M): In so far as appeals…

MOL CORPORATION,USA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 2(2)(1), INTL. TAXATION, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 845/DEL/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Sept 2022AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(3)

…n of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of Infrasoft Limited (220 Taxman 273). 3.3. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. DRP and Ld. AO failed to grant legitimate relief, by wrongly placing reliance on Gracemac vs DIT (42 SOT 550), even while noting that same has been held to be not good law by Hon'ble ITAT vide its order in ITA No.1969/Del/2014 dated September 26, 2016. 3.4. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. DRP and the Ld. AO have erred in holding that the revenue earned and received from sale of software by Microsoft Regional Sal…

MICROSOFT REGIONAL SALES CORPORATION,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-2(2)(1), GURGAON

ITA 6193/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. R.K.Panda & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No.6193/Del/2018 (Assessment Year : 2011-12)

Section 144C(5)

…September 26, 2016 to follow decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Infrasoft Limited (220 Taxman 273) is bad in law, unlawful and invalid. 2.2 Ld. DRP and Ld. AO failed to grant legitimate relief, by wrongly placing reliance on Gracemac vs DIT (42 SOT 550), even while noting that same has been held to be not good law by Hon’ble ITAT vide its order in ITA No. 1970/Del/2014 dated September 26, 2016. 2.3 That on the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, contumacious reiteration by Ld. DRP and Ld. AO that revenue of INR 23,45,22,42,102 earned by the Appellant from sale of Microsoft Retail…

MICROSOFT REGIONAL SALES CORPORATION,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-2(2)(1), GURGAON

ITA 6192/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Apr 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. R.K.Panda & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No.6193/Del/2018 (Assessment Year : 2011-12)

Section 144C(5)

…September 26, 2016 to follow decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Infrasoft Limited (220 Taxman 273) is bad in law, unlawful and invalid. 2.2 Ld. DRP and Ld. AO failed to grant legitimate relief, by wrongly placing reliance on Gracemac vs DIT (42 SOT 550), even while noting that same has been held to be not good law by Hon’ble ITAT vide its order in ITA No. 1970/Del/2014 dated September 26, 2016. 2.3 That on the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, contumacious reiteration by Ld. DRP and Ld. AO that revenue of INR 23,45,22,42,102 earned by the Appellant from sale of Microsoft Retail…

MOL CORPORATION,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 2(2)(1), INTL. TAXATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 6197/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Shri N.C. Swain, CIT- DR
Section 115Section 144C(13)Section 234BSection 271

…September 26, 2016 to follow decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Infrasoft Limited (220 Taxman 273) is bad in law, unlawful and invalid. 2.2 Ld. DRP and Ld. AO failed to grant legitimate relief, by wrongly placing reliance on Gracemac vs DIT (42 SOT 550), even while noting that same has been held to be not good law by Hon’ble ITAT vide its order in ITA No. 6089/Del/2012 dated September 26, 2016. 2.3 That on the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, contumacious reiteration by Ld. DRP and Ld. AO that revenue of INR 799,99,60,616 earned by the Appellant from sale by Microsoft Regional…

MOL CORPORATION,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 2(2)(1), INTL. TAXATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 6196/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Feb 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Shri N.C. Swain, CIT- DR
Section 115Section 144C(13)Section 234BSection 271

…September 26, 2016 to follow decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Infrasoft Limited (220 Taxman 273) is bad in law, unlawful and invalid. 2.2 Ld. DRP and Ld. AO failed to grant legitimate relief, by wrongly placing reliance on Gracemac vs DIT (42 SOT 550), even while noting that same has been held to be not good law by Hon’ble ITAT vide its order in ITA No. 6089/Del/2012 dated September 26, 2016. 2.3 That on the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, contumacious reiteration by Ld. DRP and Ld. AO that revenue of INR 799,99,60,616 earned by the Appellant from sale by Microsoft Regional…

MOL CORPORATION,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 2(2)(1), INTL. TAXATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 6195/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Feb 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Shri N.C. Swain, CIT- DR
Section 115Section 144C(13)Section 234BSection 271

…September 26, 2016 to follow decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Infrasoft Limited (220 Taxman 273) is bad in law, unlawful and invalid. 2.2 Ld. DRP and Ld. AO failed to grant legitimate relief, by wrongly placing reliance on Gracemac vs DIT (42 SOT 550), even while noting that same has been held to be not good law by Hon’ble ITAT vide its order in ITA No. 6089/Del/2012 dated September 26, 2016. 2.3 That on the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, contumacious reiteration by Ld. DRP and Ld. AO that revenue of INR 799,99,60,616 earned by the Appellant from sale by Microsoft Regional…

MOL CORPORATION,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 2(2)(1), INTL. TAXATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 6194/DEL/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Feb 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Shri N.C. Swain, CIT- DR
Section 115Section 144C(13)Section 234BSection 271

…September 26, 2016 to follow decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Infrasoft Limited (220 Taxman 273) is bad in law, unlawful and invalid. 2.2 Ld. DRP and Ld. AO failed to grant legitimate relief, by wrongly placing reliance on Gracemac vs DIT (42 SOT 550), even while noting that same has been held to be not good law by Hon’ble ITAT vide its order in ITA No. 6089/Del/2012 dated September 26, 2016. 2.3 That on the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, contumacious reiteration by Ld. DRP and Ld. AO that revenue of INR 799,99,60,616 earned by the Appellant from sale by Microsoft Regional…

GE INTELLIGENT PLATFORMS ASIA PACIFIC PTE. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 630/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jul 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Sachit Jolly, AdvFor Respondent: Dr. Prabha Kant, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 9Section 9(1)(vi)Section 90(2)

…nstituted "royalty" under s. 9{l)(vi) and Article 12(3) of the India-USA DTAA (Synopsis International 212 Taxman 454 (Kar), Samsung Electronics 345 ITR 494 (Kar), Lucent Technologies 348 ITR 196 (Kar), Citrix Systems 343 ITR 1 (AAR) & Mlcrosoft/Gracemac Corp 42 SOT 550 (Dei) followed.” 10. In this background of the case in hand, we find that the entire quarrel has now been settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence Pvt Ltd in a bunch of appeal in Civil Appeal Nos. 8733 – 8734 of 2018 and others. 11. The Hon'ble Supreme Court at para 3 observed as under: “3. O…

GE INTELLIGENT PLATFORMS ASIA PACIFIC PTE. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-1(3)(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 5814/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Sachit Jolly, AdvFor Respondent: Dr. Prabha Kant, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 9Section 9(1)(vi)Section 90(2)

…nstituted "royalty" under s. 9{l)(vi) and Article 12(3) of the India-USA DTAA (Synopsis International 212 Taxman 454 (Kar), Samsung Electronics 345 ITR 494 (Kar), Lucent Technologies 348 ITR 196 (Kar), Citrix Systems 343 ITR 1 (AAR) & Mlcrosoft/Gracemac Corp 42 SOT 550 (Dei) followed.” 10. In this background of the case in hand, we find that the entire quarrel has now been settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence Pvt Ltd in a bunch of appeal in Civil Appeal Nos. 8733 – 8734 of 2018 and others. 11. The Hon'ble Supreme Court at para 3 observed as under: “3. O…

SYMANTEC ASIA PACIFIC PTE LTD.,SINGAPORE vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1000/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Shri N.K.Billaiya, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1000/Del/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year 2013-14 Symantec Asia Pacific Pte. Ltd., 6 Temasek Boulevard, #12-01, Suntec Tower Four, Singapore 038986 ..........अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan-Aaocs1828F Vs The Dcit (International Taxation), Circle-3(1)(2), Room No.419, Block E-2, Civic Centre, …………. ""यथ" / Respondent J.L.N.Marg, New Delhi-110002. अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Sh. Nageshwar Rao, Adv. & Ms. Deepika Aggarwal, Adv. ""यथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Sh. Satpal Gulati, Cit Dr

For Appellant: Sh. Nageshwar Rao, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Satpal Gulati, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 253(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 9(1)(vi)

…e taxed as Royalty either under the provision of DTAA or under the provisions of the Act. Our attention is drawn to various parts of assessment order wherein major reliance was placed on the decision of Delhi Bench of Tribunal in Gracemac Corporation vs ADIT 42 SOT 550 (Del.). The Ld.AR for the assessee points out that the issue stands covered by the order of Hon’ble High Court in DIT vs Infrasoft Ltd. (supra) case and also by the decision of the Tribunal in subsequent case of MOL Corporation & Others for Assessment Years 2007-08 to 2009-10 in ITA Nos. 6089 to 6091/Del/2012, order dated 26.09.2016, wherein re…

JOHN DEERE EQIPMENT P. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 908/PUN/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jan 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.905 & 906/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2007-08 & 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: S/Shri Ajay Modi, Pankaj Garg and Sudhendu Das
Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vi)

…or the assessee pointed out that Mumbai Bench of Tribunal has referred to DTAA between India and Israel, which are similarly worded as DTAA between India and USA and has held that the decision of Delhi Bench of Tribunal in Gracemac Corporation Vs. ADIT (2010) 42 SOT 550 (Del) was not correct. The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee then referred to the decision of Pune Bench of Tribunal in M/s. AB Sandvik Materials Technology Vs. DCIT in ITA No.1719/PUN/2011, relating to assessment year 2008-09, order dated 24.03.2017, wherein it has been held that where the assessee was providing IT support and ad…

JOHN DEERE EQIPMENT P. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 907/PUN/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jan 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.905 & 906/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2007-08 & 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: S/Shri Ajay Modi, Pankaj Garg and Sudhendu Das
Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vi)

…or the assessee pointed out that Mumbai Bench of Tribunal has referred to DTAA between India and Israel, which are similarly worded as DTAA between India and USA and has held that the decision of Delhi Bench of Tribunal in Gracemac Corporation Vs. ADIT (2010) 42 SOT 550 (Del) was not correct. The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee then referred to the decision of Pune Bench of Tribunal in M/s. AB Sandvik Materials Technology Vs. DCIT in ITA No.1719/PUN/2011, relating to assessment year 2008-09, order dated 24.03.2017, wherein it has been held that where the assessee was providing IT support and ad…

JOHN DEERE INDIA PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 906/PUN/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jan 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.905 & 906/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2007-08 & 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: S/Shri Ajay Modi, Pankaj Garg and Sudhendu Das
Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vi)

…or the assessee pointed out that Mumbai Bench of Tribunal has referred to DTAA between India and Israel, which are similarly worded as DTAA between India and USA and has held that the decision of Delhi Bench of Tribunal in Gracemac Corporation Vs. ADIT (2010) 42 SOT 550 (Del) was not correct. The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee then referred to the decision of Pune Bench of Tribunal in M/s. AB Sandvik Materials Technology Vs. DCIT in ITA No.1719/PUN/2011, relating to assessment year 2008-09, order dated 24.03.2017, wherein it has been held that where the assessee was providing IT support and ad…

JOHN DEERE INDIA PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 905/PUN/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jan 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.905 & 906/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2007-08 & 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: S/Shri Ajay Modi, Pankaj Garg and Sudhendu Das
Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vi)

…or the assessee pointed out that Mumbai Bench of Tribunal has referred to DTAA between India and Israel, which are similarly worded as DTAA between India and USA and has held that the decision of Delhi Bench of Tribunal in Gracemac Corporation Vs. ADIT (2010) 42 SOT 550 (Del) was not correct. The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee then referred to the decision of Pune Bench of Tribunal in M/s. AB Sandvik Materials Technology Vs. DCIT in ITA No.1719/PUN/2011, relating to assessment year 2008-09, order dated 24.03.2017, wherein it has been held that where the assessee was providing IT support and ad…

GALATEA LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (IT) RG 2(3)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for A

ITA 5434/MUM/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2016AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Saktijit Daym/S. Galatea Ltd. Dcit (International Taxation) P.O. 1156, Industrial Vs. Range 2(3)(2) Area, Dalton, Israel Mumbai Pan - Aadcg8396D Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Bomi Daruwala &For Respondent: Shri Jasbir Chouhan
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 9(1)(vi)Section 90(2)

…ench of the Tribunal in ADIT v/s TII Team Telecom International Pvt. Ltd., 12 Taxman.com 502, followed the judgment of the Special Bench in Motorola Inc. (supra) after distinguishing the judgment of the co–ordinate bench in the Grace Mac Corporation v/s ADIT, 42 SOT 550 (Del.) and held that in view of Article–12(3) of India-Israel DTAA, the consideration for payment of standard software would not constitute “Royalty” under the India Israel DTAA. 39. Similar view has been taken by Co–ordinate bench of Tribunal in Financial Software and Systems Pvt. Ltd. v/s DCIT, 47 Taxman.com, 410 (Chennai), wherein it was held t…

GALATEA LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT IT RG 2(3)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal may be treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 749/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Feb 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Shri Bomi Daruwala a/wFor Respondent: Shri Jasbir Chauhan, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 9(1)(vi)

…ench of the Tribunal in ADIT v/s TII Team Telecom International Pvt. Ltd., 12 Taxman.com 502, followed the judgment of the Special Bench in Motorola Inc. (supra) after distinguishing the judgment of the co–ordinate bench in the Grace Mac Corporation v/s ADIT, 42 SOT 550 (Del.) and held that in view of Article–12(3) of India-Israel DTAA, the consideration for payment of standard software would not constitute “Royalty” under the India Israel DTAA. 39. Similar view has been taken by Co–ordinate bench of Tribunal in Financial Software and Systems Pvt. Ltd. v/s DCIT, 47 Taxman.com, 410 (Chennai), wherein it was held…