← All Phrases

“Section 9(1)(vii)(c)”

Section References (mined)Section 9Section 9(1)(vii)(c)13 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 9(1)(vii)(c) is CIT v. Samsung Electronics Ltd. (345 ITR 494), cited in 461 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 9(1)(vii)(c)

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.

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. Neyveli Lignite Corpn. Ltd.
243 ITR 459 · 2000 · High Court
91
citing judgments

Royalty involves a payment for the exclusive right to use something. Merely sharing information about a machine's design, even if tailored to a buyer's needs, does not constitute a transfer of an exclusive right to use, and therefore may not be considered royalty.

DIT v. Mitsubishi Corporation
438 ITR 174 · 2021 · Supreme Court
61
citing judgments

The proviso to section 209(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, inserted by the Finance Act, 2012, which clarified the liability of non-residents to pay advance tax, has prospective effect only. Consequently, non-residents are not liable to pay interest under section 234B for assessment years prior to AY 2012-13.

CIT v. Mitsui Engineering and Ship Building
174 CTR 66 · High Court
32
citing judgments

A High Court decision is binding on lower authorities. The issue of whether supply of drawings and designs, linked to plant and equipment sales, constitutes 'Business Profits' rather than 'Fees for Technical Services' under Section 9(1)(vii) and DTAA provisions should be considered in light of such precedent.

CESC Ltd. v. DCIT
87 ITD 653 · 2003 · ITAT
30
citing judgments

For technical services to be taxed under a tax treaty's "make available" clause, not only must the services be technical, but they must also result in the technology being made available to the recipient.

AEG Aktiengesellschaft v. CIT
267 ITR 209 · 2004 · High Court
29
citing judgments

Payments received separately for drawings and documents related to electrical portions of a mill supply contract are considered fees for technical services when they are not linked to the supply contract.

CIT v. IndusInd Bank Ltd.
415 ITR 115 · 2019 · High Court
26
citing judgments

Receipts of a non-resident for technical services are not taxable in India if the services are not utilized in India, even after retrospective amendments to Section 9. The condition of utilization of services in India remains a prerequisite for taxing such income.

Judgments citing Section 9(1)(vii)(c)

Linklaters LLP, London vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation), Circle (3)(1)(2), Mumbai

ITA 1222/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Nov 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2022-23 Linklaters Llp Assistant Commissioner Of C/O. Deloitte Haskins & Sells Income Tax (International Llp, Tower 3, 27-32 Floor, One Taxation) - 3(1)(2), International Centre, Mumbai Elphinstone Mill Compound, Vs. Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone (West), Mumbai – 400 013. (Pan: Aabcl5182G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Niraj Sheth, Advocate Revenue : Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 14.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.11.2025

For Appellant: Shri Niraj Sheth, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 144C(5)Section 9Section 9(1)Section 9(1)(vii)

Without prejudice to the above, the learned AD ought to have appreciated that in view of the specific provisions of section 9(1)(vii)(c) and also the fact that the services rendered by the appellant were not utilised by the clients in India, the appellant's entire income cannot

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (I.T) -3(2)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Mott Macdonald Limited, Mumbai

In the result all appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 5728/MUM/2024[2021 22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2025

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Ms. Padmavathy S ()

read with Article 13(3)(a) of the DTAA IT SIS charges 16,47,60,188 FTS under section 9(1)(vii)(c) of the Act read with Article 13 of the DTAA. GSC 1,57,24,563 Total 21,78,42,019 Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.AO

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (I.T) -3(2)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Mott Macdonald Limited, Mumbai

In the result all appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 5727/MUM/2024[2018 19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2025

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Ms. Padmavathy S ()

read with Article 13(3)(a) of the DTAA IT SIS charges 16,47,60,188 FTS under section 9(1)(vii)(c) of the Act read with Article 13 of the DTAA. GSC 1,57,24,563 Total 21,78,42,019 Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.AO

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (I.T) -3(2)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Mott Macdonald Limited, Mumbai

In the result all appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 5726/MUM/2024[2020 21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2025

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Ms. Padmavathy S ()

read with Article 13(3)(a) of the DTAA IT SIS charges 16,47,60,188 FTS under section 9(1)(vii)(c) of the Act read with Article 13 of the DTAA. GSC 1,57,24,563 Total 21,78,42,019 Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.AO

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (I.T) -3(2)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Mott Macdonald Limited, Mumbai

In the result all appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 5725/MUM/2024[2019 20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2025

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Ms. Padmavathy S ()

read with Article 13(3)(a) of the DTAA IT SIS charges 16,47,60,188 FTS under section 9(1)(vii)(c) of the Act read with Article 13 of the DTAA. GSC 1,57,24,563 Total 21,78,42,019 Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.AO

DCIT (International Taxation)-3(2)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Mott Macdonald Limited, Mumbai

In the result all appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 3048/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Ms. Padmavathy S ()

read with Article 13(3)(a) of the DTAA IT SIS charges 16,47,60,188 FTS under section 9(1)(vii)(c) of the Act read with Article 13 of the DTAA. GSC 1,57,24,563 Total 21,78,42,019 Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.AO

DCIT (International Taxation) 3(2)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Mott Macdonald Limited., Mumbai

In the result all appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 3047/MUM/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Ms. Padmavathy S ()

read with Article 13(3)(a) of the DTAA IT SIS charges 16,47,60,188 FTS under section 9(1)(vii)(c) of the Act read with Article 13 of the DTAA. GSC 1,57,24,563 Total 21,78,42,019 Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.AO

Same Deutz Fahr Italia Spa, Italy vs. Assistant Commissioner, Chennai

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 937/CHNY/2024[AY 2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Jan 2025

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S.R.Raghunatha, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri. S.P. Chidambaram, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT
Section 147Section 148Section 250o

down by the Apex Court, if one turns to the facts of the case in hand and examines them on the touchstone, section 9(1)(vii)(c) which clearly states 11 •••• where the fees are payable in respect of services utilized in a business or profession :-21-: ITA. No:937/Chny/2024 ... India or for the purposes of making or earning any income from any source in India." It is thus, evident that section 9(1)(vii)(c ), read in its plain, envisages the fulfilment of two conditions : services, which are source of income sought to be taxed in India must

Alcatel-- Lucent Trade International Ag, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3008/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jul 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Ms. Ananya Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 9(1)(vii)

payments made to the Appellant are for the purposes of making or earning income from a source in India as provided under Section 9(1)(vii)(c) of the Act. 2.2 That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred

Michael Page International Pte Limited, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT (International Tax) -3(2)(2) Mumbai, Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 751/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Dec 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalआअसं. 751/मुं/ 2022 ("न.व. 2018-19) Michael Page International Pte Limited, C/O.Michael Page International Recruitment Pvt. Ltd., 5Th Floor, 2North Avenue, Maker Maxity, Bandra Kurla Compelx, Mumbai -400 051 Pan:Aahcm-6965-A ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax (International Tax), Circle – 3(2)(2) Mumbai, Room No.X. 16Th Floor, Air India Bldg., Nariman Point,Mumbai – 400 021 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Shri Pratik Shah & Ms.Riddhi Maru ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 02/12/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Directed Against The Assessment Order Dated 23/02/2022 Passed U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [In Short ‘The Act’]For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2 2. The Assessee In Appeal Has Assailed The Assessment Order By Raising Following Grounds:

For Appellant: Shri Pratik Shah & Ms.Riddhi MaruFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash
Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 9(1)(vii)

conclusion that fees received by the assessee for providing business support services is in fact managerial and consultancy service as defined in section 9(1)(vii)(c), Explanation -2. Thus, the Assessing Officer held that the fees paid by Indian entity to the assessee is covered under “fees for included ... India u/s. 9(1)(i) of the Act. The amount charged was thus, held to be fees for technical services as per section 9(1)(vii) (c) r.w.s. Article 12(4) of the India – Singapore DTAA. The assessee carried the issue in appeal before the Tribunal in ITA No.144/Mum/2021 (supra

M/S. Infosys Bpo Limited, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle-1(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is allowed in favour of the assessee

ITA 987/BANG/2017[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 May 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N V Vasudevan & Shri Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri
Section 195Section 195ASection 206ASection 248Section 9Section 9(1)(vi)

case of Ishikawajma-Harima Heavy Industries Ltd. (supra) is not applicable because that decision has been rendered in respect of section 9(1)(vii)(c) which is applicable in the case of non-residents whereas clause (b) deals with residents. However, at the same time, common sense would tell

Airport Authority of India, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5163/DEL/2012[2011-12 (F.Y. 2010-11)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 May 2021

Bench: Sh. K. N. Charydr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 5162/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 5163/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Airports Authority Of India, Vs Income Tax Officer(Tds), Rajiv Gandhi Bhavan, Safdarjung Ward-1(1), Airport, New Delhi-110003 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaca6412D Assessee By : Sh. Ashish Gupta, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Sohail Malik, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 24.02.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 04.05.2021

For Appellant: Sh. Ashish Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sohail Malik, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 10(6)(ii)Section 115A

foremost it is to be appreciated that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said case had analyzed the provisions of Section 9(1)(vii)(c) of the Act, whereas for the present purpose it is Section 9(1)(vii)(b), which will be applicable, because the payer

Airport Authority of India, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5162/DEL/2012[2010-11 (F.Y. 2009-10)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 May 2021

Bench: Sh. K. N. Charydr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 5162/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 5163/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Airports Authority Of India, Vs Income Tax Officer(Tds), Rajiv Gandhi Bhavan, Safdarjung Ward-1(1), Airport, New Delhi-110003 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaca6412D Assessee By : Sh. Ashish Gupta, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Sohail Malik, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 24.02.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 04.05.2021

For Appellant: Sh. Ashish Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sohail Malik, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 10(6)(ii)Section 115A

foremost it is to be appreciated that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said case had analyzed the provisions of Section 9(1)(vii)(c) of the Act, whereas for the present purpose it is Section 9(1)(vii)(b), which will be applicable, because the payer

Section 9(1)(vii)(c) — 13 case laws | BharatTax