← All Phrases

“fees for included services”

International TaxDTAA FTS ArticleDTAA FTS Article385 judgments

The decision most relied on for fees for included services is CIT v. De Beers India Minerals (P.) Ltd. (346 ITR 467), cited in 371 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on fees for included services

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. 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.

Transmission Corporation of Andhra Pradesh v. CIT
239 ITR 587 · 1999 · Supreme Court
243
citing judgments

The Supreme Court lays down principles for deducting tax at source (TDS) under Section 195 on payments to non-residents, including aspects of income deemed taxable in India and the application of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements (DTAAs) under Section 90.

CIT v. Kotak Securities Ltd.
383 ITR 1 · 2016 · Supreme Court
203
citing judgments

Fees for technical services under Section 9(1)(vii) can include payments for fully automated services even without direct human interface, as modern technological developments blur the specific human element in such processes.

Raymond Ltd. v. Dy. CIT
86 ITD 791 · 2003 · ITAT
154
citing judgments

For services to qualify as 'Fees for Technical Services' or 'Fees for Included Services' under Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements (DTAAs), they must 'make available' technical knowledge, experience, skill, or processes to the recipient, enabling them to apply such expertise independently.

EPRSS Prepaid Recharge Services India Pvt.Ltd. v. ITO
100 Taxmann.com 52 · 2018 · Reported
101
citing judgments

Payments made for the use of cloud space do not constitute royalty payments for the purpose of Indian income tax, especially when they relate to accessing standard and automated services rather than acquiring rights to copyrighted material.

Steria (India) Ltd. v. CIT
386 ITR 390 · 2016 · High Court
83
citing judgments

Managerial services are not considered 'fees for included services' under Article 13(4) of the India-UK Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement, thus payments for such services are not taxable as FTS under the treaty.

Judgments citing fees for included services

Harley-Davidson Motor Company Inc., United States of America vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, International Tax Circle- 2(1)(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 3753/DEL/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Dec 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vimal Kumar & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraharley – Davidson Motor Vs. Acit, International Tax Company Inc. Circle –2(1)(1), C/O. H-D Motor Company New Delhi India Pvt. Ltd. Building No.5, Tower A, Level-18, Dlf Cyber City Gurgaon, Haryana – 122 002 Pan : Aacch 6849 M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri K. M. Gupta, Adv. & Shri Jaskaran Sarkaria, C.A. Respondent By Shri Vijay B. Vasanta, Cit-D.R. Date Of Hearing 26.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 27.12.2024 O R D E R Per Vimal Kumar, Jm:

Section 115A(1)(b)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(2)(b)Section 144C(5)

third party and overhead thereof ('routine GIS Services') to its affiliate in India are in the nature of fees for technical services ('FTS') / Fees for Included Services ('FIS') under Article 12 of the India - US Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement ('DTAA') (erroneous reference to the India- Singapore DTAA in the order ... entered between the parties, the services which do not make available any technical knowledge/technology are excluded from the ambit of the term fee for included services as defined in -6- ITA No.3753/Del/2023 Harley-Davidson Motor Company Inc. vs. ACIT A.Y. 2021-22 Article 12(4)(b) of the DTAA

DCIT Corporate Circle 1(1), Chennai vs. Allsec Technologies Limited, Chennai

The appeal stand partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1662/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Dec 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1255/Chny/2019 (िनधा)रणवष) / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1662/Chny/2019 (िनधा)रणवष) / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Dcit M/S. Allsec Technologies Limited बनाम/ Corporate Circle-1(1), 560, 562, 7H Century Plaza, Vs. Chennai. Teynampet, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 018. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.Aacca-5106-G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Revenue By : Ms. Kavitha (Addl.Cit) - Ld. Sr. Dr " थ"कीओरसे/ Assessee By : Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) - Ld.Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20-11-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 03-12-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1.1 Aforesaid Appeals By Revenue For Assessment Year (Ay) 2010-11 & 2011-12 Has Common Issues. First We Take Up Appeal For Ay 2010-11 Which Arises Out Of The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Chennai [Cit(A)] Dated 31-01-2019 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 143(3) R.W.S.

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) - Ld.ARFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha (Addl.CIT) - Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 195Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

assessee on disallowance u/s 40(a)(i) for connectivity charges paid without TDS as the payments falls in the nature of "fees for included services" under Article 12 4(a) of India-USA DTAA and explanation 6 to Section 9(1)(vi) and accordingly whether on the facts and circumstances ... CIT/A) to allow assessee 's appeal without appreciating the fact that connectivity charges paid to non-resident company, being in the nature of fees for included services, is taxable in India @ 15% as per Article 12 Clause 2(a)(2) of India-USA? Since all the facts in respect thereof

DCIT Corporate Circle 1(1), Chennai vs. Allsec Technologies Limited, Chennai

The appeal stand partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1255/CHNY/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Dec 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1255/Chny/2019 (िनधा)रणवष) / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1662/Chny/2019 (िनधा)रणवष) / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Dcit M/S. Allsec Technologies Limited बनाम/ Corporate Circle-1(1), 560, 562, 7H Century Plaza, Vs. Chennai. Teynampet, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 018. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.Aacca-5106-G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Revenue By : Ms. Kavitha (Addl.Cit) - Ld. Sr. Dr " थ"कीओरसे/ Assessee By : Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) - Ld.Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20-11-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 03-12-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1.1 Aforesaid Appeals By Revenue For Assessment Year (Ay) 2010-11 & 2011-12 Has Common Issues. First We Take Up Appeal For Ay 2010-11 Which Arises Out Of The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Chennai [Cit(A)] Dated 31-01-2019 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 143(3) R.W.S.

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) - Ld.ARFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha (Addl.CIT) - Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 195Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

assessee on disallowance u/s 40(a)(i) for connectivity charges paid without TDS as the payments falls in the nature of "fees for included services" under Article 12 4(a) of India-USA DTAA and explanation 6 to Section 9(1)(vi) and accordingly whether on the facts and circumstances ... CIT/A) to allow assessee 's appeal without appreciating the fact that connectivity charges paid to non-resident company, being in the nature of fees for included services, is taxable in India @ 15% as per Article 12 Clause 2(a)(2) of India-USA? Since all the facts in respect thereof

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 6(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Cma Cgm Agencies India Private Limited, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 585/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.585/Mum/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Cma Cgm Agencies Acit, Circle-6(1)(1), Mumbai Vs. India Private Limited, 407, City Tower, Boat Club Road, Pune- 411001. Pan : Aadcc3951G Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri Prakash L. Pathade Assessee By : Mahenov Thakkar Date Of Hearing : 01.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 05.11.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 14.12.2023 Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Pune [‘Cit(A)’] For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. Whether On The Facts & Circumstance Of The Case & In Law The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Directing The Ao To Delete The Addition Of Rs.9,06,53,035/- Made By Ao On Account Of Expenditure For It Service Charges U/S 40(A)(Ia) Of The It Act, 1961 Treating Such Expense Incurred By The Assessee Company As Fees For Technical Services/Royalty?

For Appellant: Mahenov ThakkarFor Respondent: Shri Prakash L. Pathade
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 40

ancillary to the enjoyment of right, property or information as per para 3 are availed that they will fall within the ambit of `fees for included services’. Para 3, in turn, defines the term ‘Royalties’ to mean : `payments of any kind received as a consideration

M/S. Spel Semiconductor Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO, Corporate Ward - 6 (2), Chennai

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 105/CHNY/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.105/Chny/2020 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16) M/S Spel Semiconductor Limited Ito बनाम/ #5, Cmda Industries Estate Corporate Ward -6(2) Vs. Chennai-603 209. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacs-8519-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) -Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Dr. Samuel Pitta (Jcit) -Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21-08-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18-10-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) -Ld. ARFor Respondent: Dr. Samuel Pitta (JCIT) -Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

that there must be a Technical knowledge, skill or experience or processes available to the recipient of the services to term it as fee for included services"; and, In this case, no technical knowledge, experience or any intangibles are made available to SPEL India. 3.7 The Commissioner of Income ... India- Singapore Treaty since the ‘make available’ clause was not satisfied. Similarly, the payment made to US entity would not be fees for included services under Article 12 of India USA DTAA due to similar ‘make available’ clause. Even otherwise this payment would fall under Article-7 as business profits