“computer software”

Chapter III - Incomes Not IncludedSection 10BSection 10B Explanation 2 / Section 80HHF951 judgments

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

Leading authorities on computer software

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.

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.

III v. HCL Technologies Ltd.

93 Taxmann.com 33 · 2018 · Supreme Court

245

citing judgments

When computing the deduction available under Section 10A of the Income-tax Act, communication expenses must be excluded from the total turnover for the purpose of calculating the eligible relief.

CIT v. Synopsis International Old Ltd.

212 Taxmann 454 · 2013 · High Court

177

citing judgments

Payments for computer software are treated as royalty income under Section 9(1)(vi) of the Income-tax Act, particularly concerning the expanded definition provided by Explanation 2 and Explanation 4.

CIT v. Asahi India Safety Glass Ltd.

346 ITR 329 · 2012 · High Court

129

citing judgments

Expenses incurred for software license purchase, development of miscellaneous software, and maintenance of websites are considered revenue in nature. Such expenses are deductible in the year they are incurred.

Amway India Enterprises v. DCIT

111 ITD 112 · 2008 · ITAT

127

citing judgments

Depreciation is allowable on computer software, including software licenses, at the rate of 60%.

Kotak Mahindra Primus Ltd. v. DDIT

11 SOT 578 · 2007 · ITAT

citing judgments

Payments for data processing services using a mainframe computer and specialized software are not taxable as fees for the use of equipment if the Indian entity lacks independent rights or physical access to use the computer or software.

Judgments citing computer software

DCIT Ltu 1, Chennai vs. M/S Royal Sundaram General Insurance Company Limited, Chennai

ITA 492/CHNY/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jan 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92 & 93 /Chny/2018 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Years: 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15, M/S.Royal Sundaram General Insurance Company Limited, Vishranthi Melaram Towers, No.2/319, Rajiv Gandhi Salai(Omr), Karapakkam, Chennai-600 097. [Pan: Aabcr7106G] Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Large Tax Payer Unit, Chennai. आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.491, 492, 493, 494, 495 & 496 /Chny/2018 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Years: 2008-09, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Large Tax Payer Unit, Chennai. M/S.Royal Sundaram General Insurance Company Limited, (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Vishranthi Melaram Towers, No.2/319, Rajiv Gandhi Salai(Omr), Karapakkam, Chennai-600 097. [Pan: Aabcr7106G] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Vikaram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri A.Sanjay For Ms V.Pushpa, सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing Sr.Standing Counsel For It Dept. घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 15.10.2024 08.01.2025 Per Bench: आदेश / Order The Following Appeals Have Been Raised By The Appellant Assessee & Appellant Revenue Contesting Assessment / Appellate Orders For Ays 2008-09 To Ay 2014-15. As The Grounds Of Appeal In Respective Appeals Of Assessee & Revenue Are Largely Common, All The Appeals Are Adjudicated Through This Common Orders. :- 2 -:

For Appellant: Shri Vikaram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.Sanjay for Ms V.Pushpa

Section 143(3)Section 148

DCIT Ltu 1, Chennai vs. M/S Royal Sundaram General Insurance Company Limited, Chennai

ITA 491/CHNY/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jan 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92 & 93 /Chny/2018 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Years: 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15, M/S.Royal Sundaram General Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Insurance Company Limited, Large Tax Payer Unit, Vishranthi Melaram Towers, Chennai. No.2/319, Rajiv Gandhi Salai(Omr), Karapakkam, Chennai-600 097. [Pan: Aabcr7106G] आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.491, 492, 493, 494, 495 & 496 /Chny/2018 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Years: 2008-09, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S.Royal Sundaram General Large Tax Payer Unit, Insurance Company Limited, Chennai. Vishranthi Melaram Towers, No.2/319, Rajiv Gandhi Salai(Omr), Karapakkam, Chennai-600 097. [Pan: Aabcr7106G] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Vikaram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri A.Sanjay For Ms V.Pushpa, सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : Sr.Standing Counsel For It Dept. घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 15.10.2024 08.01.2025 Per Bench: आदेश / Order The Following Appeals Have Been Raised By The Appellant Assessee & Appellant Revenue Contesting Assessment / Appellate Orders For Ays 2008-09 To Ay 2014-15. As The Grounds Of Appeal In Respective Appeals Of Assessee & Revenue Are Largely Common, All The Appeals Are Adjudicated Through This Common Orders. S. No. A Appeal Nos. B Ays C Appellate D Cit(A) Order Details E Revenue F 1

For Appellant: Shri Vikaram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.Sanjay for Ms V.Pushpa

Section 143(3)Section 148

No.86 & 13 others /Chny/2018 1366/Chny/2013 & 949 to 951/Chny/2018 No.1366/Mds/2013 dated 31.07.2018, where the Tribunal has allowed 60% depreciation on UPS as applicable to computer software. 24. Mr. M.Swaminathan, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Revenue fairly agreed that this issue is covered in favour of the assessee by decision ... issues raised in the appeal of the revenue save those adjudicated herein above. The first issue raised by the revenue is regarding depreciation on computer software raised vide ITA Nos.491 492, 494, 495 & 496 /Chny/2018 for AYs: 2008-09, 2010-11, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15. As regards

ACIT, Circle-2(1), Hyderabad vs. Hinduja National Power Corporation Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is allowed

ITA 235/HYD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.235/Hyd/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17) The Assistant M/S. Hinduja National Power Commissioner Of Income Vs. Corporation Ltd. Tax, Circle 2(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aabch2426D अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri K. A. Sai Prasad, C.A. रधजस्‍व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri B. Bala Krishna, Cit-Dr.

For Appellant: Shri K. A. Sai Prasad, C.AFor Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 32ASection 92C

office premises or any residential accommodation, including accommodation in the nature of a guest house; (iii) any office appliances including computers or computer software; (iv) any vehicle; or (v) any plant or machinery, the whole of the actual cost of which is allowed as deduction (whether by way of depreciation ... office premises or any residential accommodation, including accommodation in the nature of a guest house; (c) any office appliances including computers or computer software; 31 Hinduja National Power Corporation Ltd. (d) any vehicle; or (e) any plant or machinery, the whole of the actual cost of which is allowed

Shell International Petroeum Company Limited, Mumbai vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax(International Taxation)-4(2)(1), Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2059/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 2(24)Section 234ASection 234BSection 271(1)(c)

Shell International Petroleum Company Ltd. AR argued that it is a settled position that the amount received towards use of computer software is not a payment of royalty since the charges paid are towards use of copyrighted item and not for the use of copyright itself. Therefore ... also the position in law as laid down in various decisions has observed that the assessee had made purchases of computer software from the residents of Denmark and Finland. It was observed that such purchases would fall within the provisions of the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement ("DTAA") entered between India

Hakam Fluid Power Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 11(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 756/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial Member)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 44DSection 9(1)(vii)

engineering services (including the subcategories of bioengineering and aeronautical, agricultural, ceramics, chemical, civil, electrical, mechanical, metallurgical, and industrial engineering); 2. architectural services, and 3. computer software development As explained in the memorandum of understanding, technical and consultancy services could make technology available in a variety of settings, activities and industries

DCIT(It)-3(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Jefferies International Ltd, Mumbai

Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2342/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Ms. Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar &For Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar

services (including the sub-categories of bioengineering and aeronautical, agricultural, ceramics, chemical, civil, electrical, mechanical, metallurgical, and industrial engineering) ; 2. Architectural services ; and 3. Computer software development. Under paragraph 4(b), technical and consultancy services could make technology available in a variety of settings, activities and industries. Such services

DCIT(It)-3(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Jefferies International Ltd, Mumbai

Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2341/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Ms. Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar &For Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax(It)-3(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Jefferies International Ltd, Mumbai

Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1775/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Ms. Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar &For Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax(It)-3(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Jefferies International Ltd, Mumbai

Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1774/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Ms. Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar &For Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar

Pink City Jewel House Private Limited, Jaipur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Jaipur

ITA 598/JPR/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Dec 2024AY 2018-2019

For Appellant: Sh. Siddharth Ranka, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Saurav Harsh, Adv.&

Section 10ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144oSection 14ASection 263Section 69

ITA No. 598/JP/2024 Pinkcity Jewelhouse Pvt. Ltd. vs. PCIT आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, जयपुर न्यायपीठ, जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE

M/S. United Phosphors Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen. Cir. - 38, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the revenue are partly

ITA 2990/MUM/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Dec 2024AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla

For Respondent: Shri Heera Ram Choudhary, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

4099/Mum/2004 A.Y. 2000-01 M/s United Phosphorous Ltd.) 17. Additional Ground No. 2 : Proportionate deduction in respect of expenditure for service charges for computer software : Rs. 35,83,599/- This ground of appeal is not pressed by the assessee as the same has been allowed in the order giving effect

The Dy CIT CC-38, Mumbai vs. M/S. United Phosphourous Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 4099/MUM/2004[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Dec 2024AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Smt.Renu Jauhri, Accountan Member

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel, Adv &For Respondent: Shri Heera Ram Choudhary, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

4099/Mum/2004 Α.Υ. 2000-01 M/s United Phosphorous Ltd.) 17. Additional Ground No. 2 : Proportionate deduction in respect of expenditure for service charges for computer software: Rs. 35,83,599/- This ground of appeal is not pressed by the assessee as the same has been allowed in the order giving

M/S. United Phosphorus Ltd, Mumbai vs. The Dy CIT Cen Cir-38, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the revenue are partly

ITA 3456/MUM/2004[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Dec 2024AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla

For Respondent: Shri Heera Ram Choudhary, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-5(4), Mumbai vs. Larsen and Toubro Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 3369/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Dec 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt Beena Pillaishri Omkareshwar Chidara

Section 147Section 148Section 2Section 48Section 50B

Appendix-1, of the Income Tax Rules, machinery and plant forms part of item no. III of block assets in Part A. Computers including computer software fall within entry at Sr. No. (5). 8.5 The provisions of section 32 make it clear that ships and aircraft shall not be eligible

Shell Global Solutions International B.V, Mumbai vs. The ACIT, Intl. Taxn.-2, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, while the CO filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1783/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarwith Co No.20/Ahd/2022 Assessment Year : 2014-15 & 1783/Ahd/2019 Assessment Year : 2015-16 Shell Global Solutions International B.V.,, Acit, International C/O. Bsr Associates & Llp Vs Taxation-1 903, Commerce House V Ahmedabad. Nr.Vodafone House Prahaladnagar Corporation Road, Ahmedabad. Pan : Aaics 3589 H (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocate & Shri Parin Shah, Ar : Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05/09/2024 & 06/12/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 18/12/2024

Section 143(3)Section 144C

that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid decisions have held that amount payments by resident Indian and user / distributors to non-resident computer software manufacturers / suppliers as consideration for resale / use of computer software through distribution agreement is not payment for use of copy right in computer software ... aforesaid decision, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that payments made the assessee to non-resident related to use of computer software was not royalty, this issue is decided in favour of the assessee.” 39. He, therefore, stated that the impugned addition made by the AO be deleted

Shell Global Solutions International B.V, Mumbai vs. The ACIT, Intl. Taxn.-1, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, while the CO filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2390/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

Section 143(3)Section 144C

M/S. Genpact India, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6542/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Rishpal Bedi, CIT DR

Section 10ASection 143(3)

attributable to the delivery of the articles or things outside India or expenses, it any. incurred in foreign exchange in rendering of services (including computer software) outside India; 13. He submitted that a perusal of the said definition clearly shows that it is only when such expenses are included

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Genpact India, Gurgaon

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6414/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Rishpal Bedi, CIT DR

Section 10ASection 143(3)

Robert Bosch Engineering and Business Solutions Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Large Tax Payers Unit, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 593/BANG/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri Sridhar E, CIT (DR)For Respondent: Date of hearing

Section 115Section 115JSection 237Section 80J

Business Solutions Pvt. Ltd.), is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Robert Bosch GmbH, Germany. The company is engaged in the business of developing computer software, providing IT-enabled services, and developing embedded software for automobile components and accessories. 6.3 In its return of income for the year under consideration ... adjudication: . IT(TP)A No.446 & 593/Bang/2020 Page 8 of 41 1. Whether the assessee qualifies as an industrial undertaking, and whether the development of computer software and IT-enabled services amounts to the manufacture or production of an article or thing under Section 80JJAA of the Act. 2. Whether

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 2, Ltu, Bengaluru vs. M/S. Robert Bosch Engineering and Business Solutions Private Limited, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 446/BANG/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri Sridhar E, CIT (DR)For Respondent: Date of hearing

Section 115Section 115JSection 237Section 80J