← All Phrases

“Section 9(1)(vi)”

Section References (mined)Section 9Section 9(1)(vi)770 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 9(1)(vi) is Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence (P) Ltd. v. CIT (432 ITR 471), cited in 914 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 9(1)(vi)

Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence (P) Ltd. v. CIT
432 ITR 471 · 2021 · Supreme Court
914
citing judgments

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.

CIT v. Samsung Electronics Ltd.
345 ITR 494 · 2012 · High Court
461
citing judgments

Payments by Indian residents to non-resident foreign software suppliers for software are considered royalty, constituting income deemed to accrue in India under section 9(1)(v), thereby requiring tax deduction at source under section 195.

Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co. Ltd. v. DIT
332 ITR 340 · 2011 · High Court
359
citing judgments

Payments for the use of equipment, such as satellite transponders, do not constitute 'royalty' under Section 9(1)(vi) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, or under applicable tax treaties, especially when there is no transfer of the right to use a process or underlying technology.

DIT v. New Skies Satellite BV
382 ITR 114 · 2016 · High Court
325
citing judgments

An amendment to the Income Tax Act, such as the Finance Act, 2012 amendment to Section 9(1)(vi) defining royalty, does not automatically override or alter the definition of 'royalty' as provided in a Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) unless the DTAA itself is bilaterally amended. The definition of royalty in a DTAA remains unaffected by unilateral changes to domestic law.

DIT v. Nokia Networks OY
358 ITR 259 · 2013 · High Court
276
citing judgments

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).

DIT v. Infrasoft Ltd.
39 Taxmann.com 88 · 2013 · High Court
269
citing judgments

Payments for the use of copyrighted software, without the transfer of any rights in the underlying copyright itself, do not constitute 'royalty' under the Income-tax Act or tax treaties. Such payments are often treated as business income, taxable only if a permanent establishment exists.

CIT v. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft
310 ITR 320 · 2009 · High Court
259
citing judgments

Reimbursements of actual expenses without any profit element are not taxable income. Additionally, mere amendments to the Income-tax Act do not override the provisions of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements (DTAAs).

DIT v. Ericsson A.B
343 ITR 470 · 2012 · High Court
256
citing judgments

Payments for the use of copyrighted software or reimbursement of data processing costs do not constitute 'royalty' under Section 9(1)(vi) of the Income-tax Act or Article 12(3) of a DTAA where there is no transfer of copyright or rendering of services that "make available" technical knowledge. This position was later upheld by the Supreme Court.

Judgments citing Section 9(1)(vi)

9X Media P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. JCIT RG 11(1), Mumbai

ITA 7052/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Rao, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Riddhi Mishra, CIT DR
Section 115Section 14ASection 35D

Placement fees' and failing to appreciate that the payments made for use/right to use of 'process' are 'royalty' as per Explanation 6 to section 9(1)(vi) hence such payments are covered u/s. 194J of the Income-tax Act,1961 6. Whether on the facts, in the circumstances ... claim of the revenue is that those payments are made for use/right to use of process are royalty as per explanation 6 to section 9 (1) (vi) of the act and therefore such payments are covered under section 194J of the income tax act. The claim of the assessee

Dy.DIT., (It)-3(1), Mumbai vs. Global Cricket Corporation Pvt.Ltd., Mumbai

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

ITA 4990/MUM/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Oct 2023AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Dy. Cit(It) – 3(1) M/S. Global Cricket Corpn Pte Ltd. Scindia House, R. No. 132, 1St Floor, C/O. S. R. Batliboi & Co. Vs. 18Th Floor, Express Towers, N. M. Road, Mumbai- 38 Nariman Point, Mumbai-21 Pan/Gir No. Aabcg 7951 L (Revenue) : (Assessee) & Cross Objection No. 83/Mum/2012 (Arising Out Of Ita No.4990/Mum/2011) (Assessment Year: 2003-04) M/S. Global Cricket Corpn Pte Ltd. The Dy. Dit (It)-3(1) C/O. S R B C & Associates Mumbai- 400 038 14Th Floor, The Ruby, Vs. 29 Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar (W), Mumbai-400 028 Pan/Gir No. Aabcg 7951 L (Assessee) : (Revenue) : Shri P J Pardiwala/Aarati Sathe Assessee By Revenue By : Shri Ajay Kumar Sharma : 16.10.2023 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 27.10.2023

For Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Sharma
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 9(1)(vi)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, AM AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM

The ADIT (It)-3(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Global Cricket Corpn Pte. Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 171/MUM/2008[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Oct 2023AY 2002-2003

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Dy. Cit(It) – 3(1) M/S. Global Cricket Corpn Pte Ltd. Scindia House, R. No. 132, 1St Floor, C/O. S. R. Batliboi & Co. Vs. 18Th Floor, Express Towers, N. M. Road, Mumbai- 38 Nariman Point, Mumbai-21 Pan/Gir No. Aabcg 7951 L (Revenue) : (Assessee) & Cross Objection No. 83/Mum/2012 (Arising Out Of Ita No.4990/Mum/2011) (Assessment Year: 2003-04) M/S. Global Cricket Corpn Pte Ltd. The Dy. Dit (It)-3(1) C/O. S R B C & Associates Mumbai- 400 038 14Th Floor, The Ruby, Vs. 29 Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar (W), Mumbai-400 028 Pan/Gir No. Aabcg 7951 L (Assessee) : (Revenue) : Shri P J Pardiwala/Aarati Sathe Assessee By Revenue By : Shri Ajay Kumar Sharma : 16.10.2023 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 27.10.2023

For Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Sharma
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 9(1)(vi)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, AM AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM

Taj Tv Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT (It) 4(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed, while the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 894/MUM/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sant
Section 250

assessee to non- residents are specifically covered by Explanations 2, 5 and 6 and hence fall under definition of royalty as per section 9(1)(vi) of the Act; 12. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not taking ... into account that Explanation 5 and 6 to section 9(1)(vi) of the Act was inserted by the Indian Parliament by way of Finance Act, 2012 as a declaratory and clarificatory amendment with retrospective effect from the Taj TV Limited ITA no.894/Mum./2020 ITA no.1351/Mum./2020 day the source

DCIT (It) 4(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Taj Tv Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed, while the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1351/MUM/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sant
Section 250

assessee to non- residents are specifically covered by Explanations 2, 5 and 6 and hence fall under definition of royalty as per section 9(1)(vi) of the Act; 12. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not taking ... into account that Explanation 5 and 6 to section 9(1)(vi) of the Act was inserted by the Indian Parliament by way of Finance Act, 2012 as a declaratory and clarificatory amendment with retrospective effect from the Taj TV Limited ITA no.894/Mum./2020 ITA no.1351/Mum./2020 day the source

Inmarsat Solutions Bv, Mumbai vs. ACIT Range 2(1)(1) International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, appeals are partly allowed

ITA 731/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Oct 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2019-22 With Assessment Year: 2020-21. Inmarsat Solutions Bv, Vs. Acit, Mumbai, Circle- Intl. Tax. 2(1)(1), 14Th Floor, The Ruby 29 New Delhi Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar (West), Mumbai, Maharashtra Pan :Aacci9974L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 9(1)(vi)

Assessing Officer, however, did not agree with assessee’s claim. He held that the receipts are in the nature of royalty under section 9(1)(vi) of the Act as well as under Article 12 of India – Netherlands tax treaty, as, they are towards use or right ... parallel treaties. The Court delivered its judgment in the context of the very amendments that are in question today; the Explanations to Section 9(1)(vi) vis a vis the interpretation of a Double Tax Avoidance Agreement. This Court rejected that any amendment could change the situation and render

Inmarsat Solutions Bv, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle Int. Tax. 2(1) (1), New Delhi

In the result, appeals are partly allowed

ITA 1883/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Oct 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2019-22 With Assessment Year: 2020-21. Inmarsat Solutions Bv, Vs. Acit, Mumbai, Circle- Intl. Tax. 2(1)(1), 14Th Floor, The Ruby 29 New Delhi Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar (West), Mumbai, Maharashtra Pan :Aacci9974L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 9(1)(vi)

Assessing Officer, however, did not agree with assessee’s claim. He held that the receipts are in the nature of royalty under section 9(1)(vi) of the Act as well as under Article 12 of India – Netherlands tax treaty, as, they are towards use or right ... parallel treaties. The Court delivered its judgment in the context of the very amendments that are in question today; the Explanations to Section 9(1)(vi) vis a vis the interpretation of a Double Tax Avoidance Agreement. This Court rejected that any amendment could change the situation and render

DCIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi vs. Campus Eai India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 355/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40

Indian customers therefore whether impugned income earned by assessee could be said to be royalty within meaning of Explanation (2) to section 9(1)(vi) the Hon'ble Mumbai Tribunal has held that income earned from cloud hosting services cannot be treated as "Royalty", relevant extracts, as to the reasons ... have heard the rival contentions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. We noted that as per the provisions of section 9(1)(vi) of the Act royalty is taxable in India inter alia if the payer an Indian resident, except where the royalty is payable

Amadeus It Group Sa, Spain vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1)(1) Int.Taxation, New Delhi

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

ITA 1742/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Sh. Neeraj Jain &For Respondent: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

alternatively, holding that booking fee of Euro 102,026,836/- received by the appellant was taxable in India as "royalty both under section 9(1)(vi) of the Act and Article 13(3) of the Treaty. 16. That without prejudice, the DRP/ assessing officer erred on facts ... appellant from various airlines in relation to the alleged use of Altea system was taxable in India as 'royalty' both under section 9(1)(vi) of the Act and Article 13(3) of the Treaty. 19. That without prejudice, the DRP/ assessing officer erred on facts

E Service Singapore Pte Ltd., Gurugram vs. DCIT (International Taxation), New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in :

ITA 573/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: Shri Satyen Sethi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT- DR
Section 143(3)Section 9(1)(vi)

licensing of software products of „Microsoft‟ in the territory of India by the Respondent (Assessee) is not taxable in India as „Royalty‟ under Section 9(1)(vi) of the Act read with Article 12 of the Indo US DTAA, by concluding as under:- “2. Learned counsel for the appellant-Revenue ... that licensing of software products of Microsoft in the Territory of India by the Respondent was not taxable in India as Royalty under Section 9(1)(vi) of the Act read with Article 12 of the Indo US DTAA.{highlighted by us} 3. He states that the Tribunal has failed

E Service Singapore Pte Ltd., Gurugram vs. DCIT (International Taxation), New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in :

ITA 572/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: Shri Satyen Sethi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT- DR
Section 143(3)Section 9(1)(vi)

licensing of software products of „Microsoft‟ in the territory of India by the Respondent (Assessee) is not taxable in India as „Royalty‟ under Section 9(1)(vi) of the Act read with Article 12 of the Indo US DTAA, by concluding as under:- “2. Learned counsel for the appellant-Revenue ... that licensing of software products of Microsoft in the Territory of India by the Respondent was not taxable in India as Royalty under Section 9(1)(vi) of the Act read with Article 12 of the Indo US DTAA.{highlighted by us} 3. He states that the Tribunal has failed

Hp Services (Singapore) Pte Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT (International Taxation), New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in :

ITA 2142/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: Shri Satyen Sethi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT- DR
Section 143(3)Section 9(1)(vi)

licensing of software products of „Microsoft‟ in the territory of India by the Respondent (Assessee) is not taxable in India as „Royalty‟ under Section 9(1)(vi) of the Act read with Article 12 of the Indo US DTAA, by concluding as under:- “2. Learned counsel for the appellant-Revenue ... that licensing of software products of Microsoft in the Territory of India by the Respondent was not taxable in India as Royalty under Section 9(1)(vi) of the Act read with Article 12 of the Indo US DTAA.{highlighted by us} 3. He states that the Tribunal has failed

Inmarsat Solutions Bv, Maharashtra vs. ACIT (International Taxation) Circle 2(1)(1)-Delhi, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 1717/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannua N D Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti Sathe, &
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 9(1)(vi)

India. The Assessing Officer issued show cause as to why total consideration earned by the assessee should not be considered as royalty under section 9(1)(vi) of the Act and Article 13 of Indo Netherland DTAA. The assessee filed objections as under:- I.T.A. No. 1717/Del/2022 I.T.A. No. 1717/Del/2022 I.T.A ... Assessing Officer did not accept the contentions of the assessee and proposed to assess Rs.38,05,85,665/- as royalty under section 9(1)(vi)(c) of the Act and Article 12(8) of the tax treaty observing as under:- “7. The assessee's reply has been perused

M/S. Buro Happold Ltd, Mumbai vs. Dy.CIT (Int Tax) -1(3) (2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 516/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Ms. Padmavathy.Sआअसं.516/मुं/2022 (िन.व. 2018-19) Buro Happold Limited, C/O. Sudit K. Parekh & Co. Llp, Urmix Axis, 06Th Floor, Famous Studio Lane, Dr.E.Moses Road, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai 400 011. Pan: Aabcb-9239-Q ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax International Taxation -1(3)(2),Mumbai 1810, 18Th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021. ..... "ितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथ" "ारा /Appellant By : Shri Vijay Mehta "ितवादी "ारा /Respondent By : Shri Anil Sant सुनवाई की ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 10/08/2023 घोषणा की ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 27/09/2023 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sant
Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 234C

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण मुंबई पीठ “आई ”,मुंबई "ी िवकास अव"थी, "ाियक सद" एवं सु"ी प"ावती. एस, लेखाकार सद" के

ACIT (It) 3(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Juniper Networks International B.V., Mumbai

Appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1592/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

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

India as Royalty. 12 The CIT(A) held that the services rendered by the assessee are covered by the definition of "Royalty" under section 9(1)(vi) of the Act, and accordingly is liable to be taxed in India as per the provisions of the Act. However ... that the service fees received falls within the meaning of "Royalty" under the Act with the retrospective amendment to section 9(1)(vi), whether the definition of "Royalty" under the Act can be read into DTAA needs to be examined. It is a settled position that the definition of 'Royalty

ACIT (It) 3(1) (1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Juniper Networks Int. B.V., Mumbai

Appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1591/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

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

India as Royalty. 12 The CIT(A) held that the services rendered by the assessee are covered by the definition of "Royalty" under section 9(1)(vi) of the Act, and accordingly is liable to be taxed in India as per the provisions of the Act. However ... that the service fees received falls within the meaning of "Royalty" under the Act with the retrospective amendment to section 9(1)(vi), whether the definition of "Royalty" under the Act can be read into DTAA needs to be examined. It is a settled position that the definition of 'Royalty

Asstt. CIT (It)-3(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Juniper Networks International B.V, Mumbai

Appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1333/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

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

India as Royalty. 12 The CIT(A) held that the services rendered by the assessee are covered by the definition of "Royalty" under section 9(1)(vi) of the Act, and accordingly is liable to be taxed in India as per the provisions of the Act. However ... that the service fees received falls within the meaning of "Royalty" under the Act with the retrospective amendment to section 9(1)(vi), whether the definition of "Royalty" under the Act can be read into DTAA needs to be examined. It is a settled position that the definition of 'Royalty

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

process by VIL or use of any process by VIL which belongs to the Assessee. The insertion of Explanation -5 & 6 to section 9(1)(vi) of the Act only provides that the possession or control of process by the payer is not relevant and the process should ... process by VIL or transfer of any right to any process is sine qua non to qualify as "royalty" under section 9(1)(vi) of the Act. Since the process, used for providing connectivity services, is used by the Assessee and not VIL, the amount received by the Assessee cannot

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

process by VIL or use of any process by VIL which belongs to the Assessee. The insertion of Explanation -5 & 6 to section 9(1)(vi) of the Act only provides that the possession or control of process by the payer is not relevant and the process should ... process by VIL or transfer of any right to any process is sine qua non to qualify as "royalty" under section 9(1)(vi) of the Act. Since the process, used for providing connectivity services, is used by the Assessee and not VIL, the amount received by the Assessee cannot

DCIT, Circle 3(1)(2), International Taxation, New Delhi vs. Starwood (M) International Inc, Noida

In the result, appeals are dismissed

ITA 1628/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble Vice- & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2018-19 With Assessment Year: 2019-20 Dcit, Vs. Starwood (M) International Circle -3(1)(2), Inc., International Taxation, C/O- M/S. Nangia & Co. New Delhi Llp, A-109, Sector-136, Noida Pan :Aancs4030J (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 9(1)(vii)

well as the relationship between the two parties. We have already done this exercise in the context of issue relating to applicability of section 9(1)(vi) read with Explanation 2 and after examining and analyzing all the relevant clauses and articles of the said agreements in detail, we have ... promotion. He has contended that since the same come within the purview of one or the other clauses contained in Explanation 2 to section 9(1 )(vi) and (vii) as well as Article 12(3) and 12(4) of the DTAA between India and USA, the payment/consideration attributable