“royalty income”

M/S. BANK OF AMERICAN , N.A,MUMBAI vs. THE JT DIT (I.T)3, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

cost\nallocated to the assessee of Croydon Data Processing Centre. Thus, without\ngoing into the question whether the cost was in the nature of Royalty income,\nwe do not find any merit in the disallowance made under section 40(a)(i) of\nthe Act, and the same is deleted

THE DY DIT (I.T) 1(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. BANK OF AMERICA N.A., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

cost\nallocated to the assessee of Croydon Data Processing Centre. Thus, without\ngoing into the question whether the cost was in the nature of Royalty income,\nwe do not find any merit in the disallowance made under section 40(a)(i) of\nthe Act, and the same is deleted

SURENDRA HIMMATLAL SHAH ,MUMBAI vs. DY. CIT, 8(2)(1), MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH (Accountant Member)

Add/.JCIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Assessment Year 2024-2025 Officer-CPC of levying tax at rate of 30% on royalty income of Rs.19,03,766/- as against lower tax rate of 10% as per Section 115BBF of the Act. 2. Considering the facts and circumstances ... Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in Law, when the Appellant has opted for lower tax rate of 10% on royalty income which was disclosed in the return filed u/s.139(1) of the Act, the action of the Addl/JCIT(A) and Assessing Officer- CPC in denying benefit

GEMOLOGICAL INSTITUTE OF AMERICA, INC.,UNITED STATES OF AMERICA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), RANGE 2(3)(2) - MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Accordingly this ground raised by the assessee stands allowed in terms of above directions

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Hon’Ble Shri Prabhash Shankargemological Institute Of Vs. Acit (International America Taxation), Range - 5345, The Robert Mouawad 2(3)(2) Mumbai Campus, Armada Drive, Room No. 610, 6Th Carlsbad, Floor, Kautilya Bhavan, California - 092008 Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East) Mumbai – 400051 Pan/Gir No. Aadcg7962K (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri J.D. Mistry-Sr. Adv./Gunjan Kakkad Revenue By Shri Krishna Kumar (Sr. Dr.) Date Of Hearing 03.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 09.03.2026 आदेश / Order Per Sandeep Gosain, Jm: The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Challenging The Impugned Order 03.09.2025 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 254 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’), By The Office Of The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 2(3)(2), Mumbai, For The Assessment Year 2020-21. The Following Grounds Are Reproduced Below:

being the amount of royalty received for the year. 1:3 The Appellant submits that the Assessing Officer be directed to consider the royalty income on the basis of the actual income earned for the year in accordance with the directions of the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal vide ... expunge his remark on page No. 07 of the impugned Final Assessment Order dated 03 September 2025 wherein it has been mentioned that "Royalty income attributable to PE as discussed in the original assessment order dt. 12/01/2023". 2:0 Re.: Non-granting of interest u/s. 244A

DCIT-CIRCLE 1(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. DIEBOLD INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue and the\nCOs filed by the assessee stand dismissed

such person outside India or for the\npurposes of making or earning any income from any source outside India\nSection 9(1)(vi) -Royalty Income by way of royalty payable by a Resident\nshall be deemed to accrue or arise in India except where the royalty is\npayable in respect

DCIT-CIRCLE 1(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. DIEBOLD INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

such person outside India or for the purposes of making or earning any income from any source outside India Section 9(1)(vi) -Royalty Income by way of royalty payable by a Resident shall be deemed to accrue or arise in India except where the royalty is payable in respect

DCIT-CIRCLE 1(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. DIEBOLD INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue and the\nCOs filed by the assessee stand dismissed

such person outside India or for the\npurposes of making or earning any income from any source outside India\nSection 9(1)(vi) -Royalty Income by way of royalty payable by a Resident\nshall be deemed to accrue or arise in India except where the royalty is\npayable in respect

DCIT-CIRCLE 1(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. DIEBOLD INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue and the\nCOS filed by the assessee stand dismissed

such person outside India or for the\npurposes of making or earning any income from any source outside India\nSection 9(1)(vi) -Royalty Income by way of royalty payable by a Resident\nshall be deemed to accrue or arise in India except where the royalty is\npayable in respect

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 8 2 MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ABHINAND VENTURES PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

Accordingly all these appeals of revenue are to be treated, as dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

basis of the same reasoning as in A.Y. 2013-14. Further, the AO has also observed that as per Accounting Standard-9 of ICAI, royalty income is required to be accounted for on accrual basis. However, as can be seen from the order of the Hon'ble ITAT

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 8 2 MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ABHINAND VENTURES PRIVATE LIMITED , MUMBAI

Accordingly all these appeals of revenue are to be treated, as dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

basis of the same reasoning as in A.Y. 2013-14. Further, the AO has also observed that as per Accounting Standard-9 of ICAI, royalty income is required to be accounted for on accrual basis. However, as can be seen from the order of the Hon'ble ITAT

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 8 2 MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ABHINAND VENTURES PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

Accordingly all these appeals of revenue are to be treated, as dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

basis of the same reasoning as in A.Y. 2013-14. Further, the AO has also observed that as per Accounting Standard-9 of ICAI, royalty income is required to be accounted for on accrual basis. However, as can be seen from the order of the Hon'ble ITAT

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 8 2 MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ABHINAND VENTURES PRIVATE LIMITED , MUMBAI

Accordingly all these appeals of revenue are to be treated, as dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

basis of the same reasoning as in A.Y. 2013-14. Further, the AO has also observed that as per Accounting Standard-9 of ICAI, royalty income is required to be accounted for on accrual basis. However, as can be seen from the order of the Hon'ble ITAT

DCIT, MUMBAI vs. ABHINAND VENTURES PRIVATE LIMITED , MUMBAI

Accordingly all these appeals of revenue are to be treated, as dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

basis of the same reasoning as in A.Y. 2013-14. Further, the AO has also observed that as per Accounting Standard-9 of ICAI, royalty income is required to be accounted for on accrual basis. However, as can be seen from the order of the Hon'ble ITAT