← All Phrases

“Section 9(1)”

Section References (mined)Section 9Section 9(1)1,741 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 9(1) 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)

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.

Ishikawajima Harima Heavy Industries Ltd. v. DIT
288 ITR 408 · 2007 · Supreme Court
394
citing judgments

Income from offshore supply of goods and services is not taxable in India if the entire transaction, including transfer of ownership and payments, occurs outside India.

CIT v. De Beers India Minerals (P.) Ltd.
346 ITR 467 · 2012 · High Court
371
citing judgments

For fees for technical or consultancy services to 'make available' technical knowledge or know-how under a DTAA, the service must transmit such knowledge, allowing the recipient to derive an enduring benefit and utilize it independently in the future.

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).

CIT v. Toshoku Ltd.
125 ITR 525 · 1980 · Supreme Court
270
citing judgments

A non-resident commission agent is not chargeable to tax in India on commission income if no business operations are carried out in India. Consequently, no TDS is required under Section 195 on such payments.

Judgments citing Section 9(1)

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax(It)-2(1)-2 Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu India LLP, Mumbai

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

ITA 2723/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon'Ble & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Niraj Sheth and Ms. Darshana Shah, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 195(1)Section 195(2)Section 9(1)(vi)

made for (1) Global technology/Knowledge management, (2) Global Communication and (3) Global Brand are in the nature of royalty as per section 9(1)(vi) of the Act and Article 13 of the DTAA between India and UK. Thus, he gave the following directions for deducting tax at source ... concerning commercial or knowledge, experience or skill as contemplated in the definition of royalty as contained in clause (iv) of Explanation 2 to section 9(1)(vi) or under article 11(3)(a) of the India-UK tax treaty. In support of his contention, he relied upon the following decisions

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax(It)-2(1)-2 Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Deloitte Haskins & Sells LLP, Mumbai

ITA 2722/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon'Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Niraj Sheth andFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 195(1)Section 195(2)Section 9(1)(vi)

made for (1) Global technology/Knowledge management, (2) Global Communication and (3) Global Brand is in the nature of Royalty as per the section 9(1)(vi) of the Act and Article 13 of the DTAA between India and UK. Thus, he gave following directions for deducting tax at source

Adp Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle 1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 975/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: CA, Sriram SeshadriFor Respondent: MS. U Mini Chandran, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 153Section 195Section 234ASection 40Section 92C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “A” BENCH: HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI MANJUNATHA G, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD

Bain and Company, Usa vs. DCIT, Gurgoan

In the result, appeal of assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 3056/DEL/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Ekta Jain, CIT- DR
Section 143(3)

when it comes to the expression "use of, or the right to use", the same position would obtain under explanation 2(v) of section 9(1)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, inasmuch as, there must, under the licence granted or sale made, be a transfer ... difference in the position between the definition of "royalties" in the DTAAs and the definition of "royalty" in explanation 2(v) of section 9(1)(vi) of the Income Tax Act. 73. Even if we were to consider the ambit of "royalty" only under the Income

Veritas Storage (Singapore) Pte. Ltd, Singapore vs. DCIT, Circle 3(1)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of assessee in ITA No

ITA 1913/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Gulati, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vedanshu Tripathi, CIT- DR
Section 143(3)

treat the receipts of Rs. 1,29,26,30,316/- excluding the receipts from hardware appliances, as FTS under the provisions of section 9(1)(vii) of the Act read with Explanation 2 and under Article 12 of the DTAA between Singapore and India treaty. The DRP however, excluded

Bain & Company, Inc., Usa vs. DCIT Intl. Taxation Circle, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1677/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Ekta Jain, CIT- DR
Section 143(3)

when it comes to the expression "use of, or the right to use", the same position would obtain under explanation 2(v) of section 9(1)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, inasmuch as, there must, under the licence granted or sale made, be a transfer ... difference in the position between the definition of "royalties" in the DTAAs and the definition of "royalty" in explanation 2(v) of section 9(1)(vi) of the Income Tax Act. 73. Even if we were to consider the ambit of "royalty" only under the Income

The Dy. Commr. of Income Tax, Cir.-3(1), Rajkot-Gujarat vs. M/S. Sonpal Exports Pvt. Ltd., Rajkot-Gujarat

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 29/RJT/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 29/Rjt/2018 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) The Dcit, Circle – 3(1), Vs. M/S. Sonpal Exports Pvt. Ltd. Rajkot Aayakar Bhavan, Room Dhari Bagsara Road, Nr. Ice No. 114, 1St Floor, Race Course Factory, Amreli Ring Road, Rajkot Pan No.: Aajcs0177N (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Praveen Verma, Ld. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 24/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 21/08/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am; By Way Of This Appeal, The Revenue, Has Challenged Correctness Of The Order Dated 16.11.2017, Passed By The Learned Cit(A), In The Matter Of Assessment Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961, For The Assessment Year 2012-13. Grievances Raised By The Revenue, Which Are Interconnected & Will Be Taken Up Together, Are As Follows: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs. 13,96,33,023/- Holding That Provision Of Section 195 Will Not Be Applicable. 2. On The Facts Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. C.I.T. (A) Erred In Ignoring The Facts That The Assessee Has Failed To Prove The Genuineness Of Foreign Commission Expenses Before The A.O. 3. It Is, Therefore, Prayed That The Order Of The C.I.T. (A) May Be Set Aside & That Of The A.O. Be Restored To The Above Extent. Dcit Vs. M/S. Sonpal Export Pvt. Ltd.

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Verma, Ld. CIT(DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 195

engaged in the services executed outside India and cannot be considered to carry on any business operation in India and therefore provisions of Section 9 (1) (i) will not be applicable. It is also evident that the payments made to foreign agent is sales commission and cannot be deemed ... technical services and thus provisions of section 9 (1) (vii) will also be not applicable. Now, if the payments to the foreign agents are not a receipt (in agent's hand) which is liable to tax in India, then there is no question of deduction of tax at source

Venugoopal Subramanyam Raja, Kumbakonam vs. DCIT Cirle 2(1), Trichy

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2857/CHNY/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Aug 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2855, 2856 & 2857/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2007-08, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Venugoopal Subramaniyam Raja, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of 40/41, Town High School Road, Income Tax, Kumbakonam 612 001, Tamil Nadu. Circle 2(1), Trichy. [Pan:Aafpr5570F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri C. Sivakumar, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 20.08.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.08.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: These Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders All Dated 09.09.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Years 2007-08, 2009-10 & 2010-11. 2. Since Issues Raised In These Appeals Are Similar Based On The Same Identical Facts, With The Consent Of The Both The Parties, We Proceed To Hear The Appeals Together & Pass Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience.

For Appellant: Shri R. Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri C. Sivakumar, Addl. CIT
Section 195Section 40Section 9Section 9(1)(v)

accrue in India and the interest payment made by the assessee is an income deemed to accrue or arise in India under section 9(1)(v)(c) of the Act and accordingly, the Assessing Officer disallowed the entire interest expenditure under section 40(a)(i) of the Act for violation ... provisions under section 195 of the Act does not apply. He submits that the ITAT 5 I.T.A. No.2855-2857/Chny/24 decided the issue under section 9(1)(v)(c) of the Act and since the ITAT could not decide the applicability of section 195 of the Act, in the present appeals

Venugoopal Subramanyam Raja, Kumbakonam vs. DCIT Cirle 2(1), Trichy

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2856/CHNY/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Aug 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2855, 2856 & 2857/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2007-08, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Venugoopal Subramaniyam Raja, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of 40/41, Town High School Road, Income Tax, Kumbakonam 612 001, Tamil Nadu. Circle 2(1), Trichy. [Pan:Aafpr5570F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri C. Sivakumar, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 20.08.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.08.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: These Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders All Dated 09.09.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Years 2007-08, 2009-10 & 2010-11. 2. Since Issues Raised In These Appeals Are Similar Based On The Same Identical Facts, With The Consent Of The Both The Parties, We Proceed To Hear The Appeals Together & Pass Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience.

For Appellant: Shri R. Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri C. Sivakumar, Addl. CIT
Section 195Section 40Section 9Section 9(1)(v)

accrue in India and the interest payment made by the assessee is an income deemed to accrue or arise in India under section 9(1)(v)(c) of the Act and accordingly, the Assessing Officer disallowed the entire interest expenditure under section 40(a)(i) of the Act for violation ... provisions under section 195 of the Act does not apply. He submits that the ITAT 5 I.T.A. No.2855-2857/Chny/24 decided the issue under section 9(1)(v)(c) of the Act and since the ITAT could not decide the applicability of section 195 of the Act, in the present appeals

Venugoopal Subramanyam Raja, Kumbakonam vs. DCIT Cirle 2(1), Trichy

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2855/CHNY/2024[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Aug 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2855, 2856 & 2857/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2007-08, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Venugoopal Subramaniyam Raja, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of 40/41, Town High School Road, Income Tax, Kumbakonam 612 001, Tamil Nadu. Circle 2(1), Trichy. [Pan:Aafpr5570F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri C. Sivakumar, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 20.08.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.08.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: These Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders All Dated 09.09.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Years 2007-08, 2009-10 & 2010-11. 2. Since Issues Raised In These Appeals Are Similar Based On The Same Identical Facts, With The Consent Of The Both The Parties, We Proceed To Hear The Appeals Together & Pass Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience.

For Appellant: Shri R. Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri C. Sivakumar, Addl. CIT
Section 195Section 40Section 9Section 9(1)(v)

accrue in India and the interest payment made by the assessee is an income deemed to accrue or arise in India under section 9(1)(v)(c) of the Act and accordingly, the Assessing Officer disallowed the entire interest expenditure under section 40(a)(i) of the Act for violation ... provisions under section 195 of the Act does not apply. He submits that the ITAT 5 I.T.A. No.2855-2857/Chny/24 decided the issue under section 9(1)(v)(c) of the Act and since the ITAT could not decide the applicability of section 195 of the Act, in the present appeals

DCIT(TDS)-2(1), Mumbai vs. Piramal Enterprises Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4431/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhaildeputy Commissioner Of Income Tax (Tds) – 2(1), Mumbai, ............... Appellant V/S Piramal Enterprises Limited, Piramal Ananta, Agastya Corporate Park Kamini Junction Lbs Marg Opp. Fire Brigade Kurla, ……………… Respondent Mumbai – 400070 Pan : Aaacn5024A

For Appellant: Shri Ronak Doshi (Virtually present)For Respondent: Shri R.A. Dhyani, CIT-DR
Section 133B(2)Section 193Section 194ASection 201(1)Section 250

termed as "interest" within the meaning of section 2(28A) or "fees for technical services for service" within the meaning of section 9(1)(vii). 10. The definition of "interest" u/s 2(28A) reads as under:- "interest" means interest payable in any manner in respect of any moneys borrowed

Andhra Pradesh Power Generation Corporation Limited, Vijayawada vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Vijayawada

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

ITA 197/VIZ/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam20 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member), SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37(1)Section 40

noticed that the Ld. Pr. CIT has erroneously considered the cost of water as ‘royalty’ paid to the State Government. Explanation-2 to section 9(1)(vi) defines the expression ‘royalty’ and in our opinion the water charges are paid by the assessee cannot be considered as royalty

Andhra Pradesh Power Generation Corporation Limited, Vijayawada vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle1(1), Vijayawada

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

ITA 196/VIZ/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam20 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37(1)Section 40

noticed that the Ld. Pr. CIT has erroneously considered the cost of water as ‘royalty’ paid to the State Government. Explanation-2 to section 9(1)(vi) defines the expression ‘royalty’ and in our opinion the water charges are paid by the assessee cannot be considered as royalty

Andhra Pradesh Power Generation Corporation Limited, Vijayawada vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Vijayawada

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

ITA 195/VIZ/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam20 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member), SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37(1)Section 40

noticed that the Ld. Pr. CIT has erroneously considered the cost of water as ‘royalty’ paid to the State Government. Explanation-2 to section 9(1)(vi) defines the expression ‘royalty’ and in our opinion the water charges are paid by the assessee cannot be considered as royalty

Andhra Pradesh Power Generation Corporation Limited, Vijayawada vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Vijayawada

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

ITA 193/VIZ/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam20 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member), SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37(1)Section 40

noticed that the Ld. Pr. CIT has erroneously considered the cost of water as ‘royalty’ paid to the State Government. Explanation-2 to section 9(1)(vi) defines the expression ‘royalty’ and in our opinion the water charges are paid by the assessee cannot be considered as royalty

Andhra Pradesh Power Generation Corporation Limited, Vijayawada vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Vijayawada

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

ITA 192/VIZ/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam20 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member), SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37(1)Section 40

noticed that the Ld. Pr. CIT has erroneously considered the cost of water as ‘royalty’ paid to the State Government. Explanation-2 to section 9(1)(vi) defines the expression ‘royalty’ and in our opinion the water charges are paid by the assessee cannot be considered as royalty

Andhra Pradesh Power Generation Corporation Limited, Vijayawada vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Vijayawada

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

ITA 191/VIZ/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam20 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member), SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37(1)Section 40

noticed that the Ld. Pr. CIT has erroneously considered the cost of water as ‘royalty’ paid to the State Government. Explanation-2 to section 9(1)(vi) defines the expression ‘royalty’ and in our opinion the water charges are paid by the assessee cannot be considered as royalty

ACIT, Circle-61(1), New Delhi vs. Subramaniam Hariharan, New Delhi

ITA 600/DEL/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Tanya Sharma, Sr. Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 40

services as being covered within the meaning of Fees for Technical Services (FTS) and therefore, chargeable to tax in India in terms of section 9(1)(vii) of the Act. 6 ITAs No.600/Del/2020, 9832/Del/2019 & 2134/Del/2018 9. We observe that in terms of the scheme of the Act, section ... Counsel, wherein, payment of professional fee is conspicuously absent. 10. In this context we find that Explanation 2 to section 9(1)(vii) of the Act defines FTS to mean payments of any kind to any person in consideration for services of a managerial, technical or consultancy nature, including

Subramaniam Hariharan, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-63(1), New Delhi

ITA 9832/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

For Respondent: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 40

services as being covered within the meaning of Fees for Technical Services (FTS) and therefore, chargeable to tax in India in terms of section 9(1)(vii) of the Act. 6 ITAs No.600/Del/2020, 9832/Del/2019 & 2134/Del/2018 9. We observe that in terms of the scheme of the Act, section ... Counsel, wherein, payment of professional fee is conspicuously absent. 10. In this context we find that Explanation 2 to section 9(1)(vii) of the Act defines FTS to mean payments of any kind to any person in consideration for services of a managerial, technical or consultancy nature, including

Anand and Anand, New Delhi vs. JCIT, Range- 37, New Delhi

ITA 2134/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

For Respondent: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 40

services as being covered within the meaning of Fees for Technical Services (FTS) and therefore, chargeable to tax in India in terms of section 9(1)(vii) of the Act. 6 9. We observe that in terms of the scheme of the Act, section 4 of the Act provides that ... Counsel, wherein, payment of professional fee is conspicuously absent. 10. In this context we find that Explanation 2 to section 9(1)(vii) of the Act defines FTS to mean payments of any kind to any person in consideration for services of a managerial, technical or consultancy nature, including