← All Phrases

“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
99
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

Zensar Technologies Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 2(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in the terms aforesaid

ITA 8870/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Dec 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Ms. Padmavathy.Sआअसं.8870/मुं/2010 (िन.व. 2006-07) M/S. Zensar Technologies Ltd., Magnet House, 2Nd Floor, N.M.Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai – 400 001 Pan: Aaacf- 0742- K ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. Dcit-2(3), 5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 020 ..... "ितवादी/Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar- CIT DR
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 14A

Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short ‘the Act’]. 2. The assessee is engaged in the business of Development and Marketing of Computer Software. The assessee provides both Offshore (from its unit located at Pune) and Onsite services to its customers. During the relevant 2 previous year, the assessee had entered

Larsen & Tourbro Infotech Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 2(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 585/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2023AY 2007-08
Section 10Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

copies of contract with the clients were also called upon. On perusal of these contracts, it is noted that the assessee has hot developed computer software as such, rather it has deputed its staff wholly and exclusively for the use of the clients. Further, the contracts with clients suggest that ... Establishment (P.E.) in the countries wherein its clients are located. On this factual finding it was held that the assessee has not developed any computer software in respect of expenditure incurred in foreign currency and such expenditure Incurred in foreign currency has not resulted into an income which is derived

Larsen & Toubro Infotech Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT-2(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 2641/MUM/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2023AY 2006-07
Section 10Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

copies of contract with the clients were also called upon. On perusal of these contracts, it is noted that the assessee has hot developed computer software as such, rather it has deputed its staff wholly and exclusively for the use of the clients. Further, the contracts with clients suggest that ... Establishment (P.E.) in the countries wherein its clients are located. On this factual finding it was held that the assessee has not developed any computer software in respect of expenditure incurred in foreign currency and such expenditure Incurred in foreign currency has not resulted into an income which is derived

Everest Business Advisory India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1907/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaassessment Year: 2010-11 . Everest Business Advisory Vs. Acit, India Pvt. Ltd., Circle-11(1), A-1/B-27, Janak Puri, New Delhi New Delhi Pan :Aabce2871R (Appellant) (Respondent)

activity involves export in software services. Further, in the Note to Accounts it is stated that the company is engaged in the development of computer software. The segmental break-up at page 109 of the paper-book, though, mentions three 8 | P a g e AY: 2010-11 segments, however

Isys Softech Private Limited, Jaipur vs. CIT (A), Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 528/JPR/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. G. M. MehtaFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 195(1)Section 271CSection 40Section 9(1)(vi)

resident- Royalty vis a vis payment for purchase of Shrink-wrapped software- Amount paid by resident Indian- end users/distributors to non-resident computer software manufacturer/suppliers as consideration for the re-sale/use of computer software is not the payment of royalty for the use of copy right in the computer

DCIT 2(3), Mumbai vs. Zensar Technologies Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 8389/MUM/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Nov 2023AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanआअसं.8389/मुं/2010 (िन.व. 2005-06) Dcit-2(3), Room No.555, 5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 020 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. M/S. Zensar Technologies Ltd., Magnet House, 2Nd Floor, N.M.Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai – 400 001 Pan: Aaacz 0742 K ....."ितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : Shri Manoj Kumar, Cit - Dr "ितवादी"ारा/Respondent By : Shri Nitesh Joshi, Advocate सुनवाई की ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 22/08/2023 घोषणा की ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 13/11/2023 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Kumar, CIT - DRFor Respondent: Shri Nitesh Joshi, Advocate
Section 10ASection 244ASection 92C

section 10A of the Act would show that “export turnover” does not include telecommunication charges and insurance charges attributable to the delivery of computer software outside India. Before the Assessing Officer, the assessee failed to submit necessary 6 details with regard to link charges between incoming data and outgoing data ... does not include telecommunication charges. It is no more res-integra that freight, telecommunication charges, or insurance charges attributable to the delivery of the Computer Software outside India are to be excluded from export turnover as well as total turnover. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case

M/S. Standard Chartered Bank, Mumbai vs. DDIT (I.T) - 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of revenue is partly allowed

ITA 3377/MUM/2006[1998-1999]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Nov 2023AY 1998-1999

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalstandard Chartered Bank Taxation Department, 23-25, M. G. Road, 3Rd Floor, Fort, Mumbai-400 001 Pan: Aabcs4681D ..... Appellant Vs. Ddit (Intl. Tax)-2(1) Scindia House, Ballard Estate, N. M. Marg, Mumbai-400 038 ..... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sant, Ld. DR
Section 115JSection 145Section 195Section 195(1)Section 250Section 40Section 90(2)

learned CIT (A) has not dealt with the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer on account of expenditure incurred on Computer Software Rs. 2, 78 ,39,000/- and Renovation and Repairs Rs. 64 ,00,899/- 4. TAXABILITY U/S. 115JA (Pages 37 to 39 of Ld. ClT (A)' order) Without prejudice ... dealt with the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer on account of expenditure incurred on Computer Software of INR 2,78,39,000/- and renovation and repairs of INR 64,00,899/-. 3.2 Brief Facts: a) During the F.Y. under consideration, the Appellant has incurred expenditure on renovation

Sureprep (India) P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 8(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 5855/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalआअसं.2243/मुं/2013 (िन.व.2009-10) आअसं.5523/मुं/2013 (िन.व.2010-11) आअसं.5855/मुं/2014 (िन.व.2011-12) M/S. Sureprep (India) Private Limited, 4Th Floor, Dhantak Plaza, Makwana Road, Marol, Andheri(E), Mumbai – 400 034. Pan: Aahcs-9039-H ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 8(3)(2), 2Nd Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 020. ..... "ितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : Shri Dalpat Shah & Ms. Arti Shah "ितवादी "ारा/Respondent By : Ms. Samrudhi Dhananjay Hande & Shri P.D. Chougule सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 25/08/2023 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 03/11/2023 आदेश आदेश/ Order आदेश आदेश Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: These Three Appeals By The Assessee For Assessment Years 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 Are Taken Up Together For Adjudication As The Issues Involved In These Appeals Are Identical. The Appeal Of Assessee For Assessment Year 2009-10 Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-18, Mumbai [ In Short ‘The Cit(A)’ ], Dated 02/01/2013

For Appellant: Shri Dalpat Shah & Ms. Arti ShahFor Respondent: Ms. Samrudhi Dhananjay Hande &
Section 10ASection 10A(7)Section 143(3)Section 1O

this section, a deduction of such profits and gains as are derived by an undertaking from the export of articles or things or computer software for a period of ten consecutive assessment years beginning with the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which the undertaking begins to manufacture ... produce such articles or things or computer software, as the case may be, shall be allowed from the total income of the assessee:” A bare perusal of the provisions of sub-section(1) would show that the assessee is eligible to claim deduction for a period of ten consecutive assessment

Sureprep (India)P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 8(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 5523/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Nov 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalआअसं.2243/मुं/2013 (िन.व.2009-10) आअसं.5523/मुं/2013 (िन.व.2010-11) आअसं.5855/मुं/2014 (िन.व.2011-12) M/S. Sureprep (India) Private Limited, 4Th Floor, Dhantak Plaza, Makwana Road, Marol, Andheri(E), Mumbai – 400 034. Pan: Aahcs-9039-H ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 8(3)(2), 2Nd Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 020. ..... "ितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : Shri Dalpat Shah & Ms. Arti Shah "ितवादी "ारा/Respondent By : Ms. Samrudhi Dhananjay Hande & Shri P.D. Chougule सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 25/08/2023 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 03/11/2023 आदेश आदेश/ Order आदेश आदेश Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: These Three Appeals By The Assessee For Assessment Years 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 Are Taken Up Together For Adjudication As The Issues Involved In These Appeals Are Identical. The Appeal Of Assessee For Assessment Year 2009-10 Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-18, Mumbai [ In Short ‘The Cit(A)’ ], Dated 02/01/2013

For Appellant: Shri Dalpat Shah & Ms. Arti ShahFor Respondent: Ms. Samrudhi Dhananjay Hande &
Section 10ASection 10A(7)Section 143(3)Section 1O

this section, a deduction of such profits and gains as are derived by an undertaking from the export of articles or things or computer software for a period of ten consecutive assessment years beginning with the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which the undertaking begins to manufacture ... produce such articles or things or computer software, as the case may be, shall be allowed from the total income of the assessee:” A bare perusal of the provisions of sub-section(1) would show that the assessee is eligible to claim deduction for a period of ten consecutive assessment

Sureprep (India) P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO RG 8(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2243/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Nov 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalआअसं.2243/मुं/2013 (िन.व.2009-10) आअसं.5523/मुं/2013 (िन.व.2010-11) आअसं.5855/मुं/2014 (िन.व.2011-12) M/S. Sureprep (India) Private Limited, 4Th Floor, Dhantak Plaza, Makwana Road, Marol, Andheri(E), Mumbai – 400 034. Pan: Aahcs-9039-H ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 8(3)(2), 2Nd Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 020. ..... "ितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : Shri Dalpat Shah & Ms. Arti Shah "ितवादी "ारा/Respondent By : Ms. Samrudhi Dhananjay Hande & Shri P.D. Chougule सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 25/08/2023 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 03/11/2023 आदेश आदेश/ Order आदेश आदेश Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: These Three Appeals By The Assessee For Assessment Years 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 Are Taken Up Together For Adjudication As The Issues Involved In These Appeals Are Identical. The Appeal Of Assessee For Assessment Year 2009-10 Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-18, Mumbai [ In Short ‘The Cit(A)’ ], Dated 02/01/2013

For Appellant: Shri Dalpat Shah & Ms. Arti ShahFor Respondent: Ms. Samrudhi Dhananjay Hande &
Section 10ASection 10A(7)Section 143(3)Section 1O

this section, a deduction of such profits and gains as are derived by an undertaking from the export of articles or things or computer software for a period of ten consecutive assessment years beginning with the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which the undertaking begins to manufacture ... produce such articles or things or computer software, as the case may be, shall be allowed from the total income of the assessee:” A bare perusal of the provisions of sub-section(1) would show that the assessee is eligible to claim deduction for a period of ten consecutive assessment

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 1(1), Bhilai, Durg vs. Bhilai Jaypee Cement Ltd., Bhilai, Durg

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 241/RPR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur30 Oct 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am (Ita No.241/Rpr/2023) (Assessment Year: 2015-16) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax 1(1), V Bhilai Jaypee Cement Ltd, Bhilai, Durg S Bsp Premises, Slag Yard Road (Opp Sector 4 Nmoh), Bhilai Pan: Aadcb1675Q (अपीलाथ" /Applicant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri. R.B. Doshi, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri. Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 25-10-2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date Of : 30-10-2023 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am:

For Appellant: Shri. R.B. Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(24)(x)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 68

dt.021412019 (Born.) (HO): During the original scrutiny assessment, the Assessing Officer had examined the Assessee's- claim. of computer software expenses. Through the reopening process, Assessing Officer desired to re-exam in the same. Without there being. new tangible material available with him, the Tribunal correctly held that the same

Inmarsat Solutions Bv, Mumbai vs. ACIT Range 2(1)(1) International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, appeals are partly allowed

ITA 731/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Oct 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2019-22 With Assessment Year: 2020-21. Inmarsat Solutions Bv, Vs. Acit, Mumbai, Circle- Intl. Tax. 2(1)(1), 14Th Floor, The Ruby 29 New Delhi Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar (West), Mumbai, Maharashtra Pan :Aacci9974L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 9(1)(vi)

Branch, which has been incorporated above, it is evident that the Head Office only has the non–exclusive non–transferrable rights to use the computer software brought for personal use and clause 16 of the said agreement specifically provides that the Head Office does not have any right to assign ... license or otherwise transfer the license of this agreement. Thus, the payment by the Branch for use of computer software is not the right in the copy right but only for doing the work from the said software which subsist in the copy right of the software. The branch

Inmarsat Solutions Bv, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle Int. Tax. 2(1) (1), New Delhi

In the result, appeals are partly allowed

ITA 1883/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Oct 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2019-22 With Assessment Year: 2020-21. Inmarsat Solutions Bv, Vs. Acit, Mumbai, Circle- Intl. Tax. 2(1)(1), 14Th Floor, The Ruby 29 New Delhi Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar (West), Mumbai, Maharashtra Pan :Aacci9974L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 9(1)(vi)

Branch, which has been incorporated above, it is evident that the Head Office only has the non–exclusive non–transferrable rights to use the computer software brought for personal use and clause 16 of the said agreement specifically provides that the Head Office does not have any right to assign ... license or otherwise transfer the license of this agreement. Thus, the payment by the Branch for use of computer software is not the right in the copy right but only for doing the work from the said software which subsist in the copy right of the software. The branch

Tech Mahindra Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 2(3), Mumbai

Appeal is dismissed and assessee's appeal is partly allowed

ITA 3643/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 92C(3)

Telecommunications, which is a venture partner and also the major customer of the assessee. The assessee is engaged in the business of development of computer software and other related services. The assessee filed the return of income for A.Y. 2007-08 on 29/10/2007 declaring a total income of Rs.23 ... turnover towards expenditure in foreign currency and telecommunication expenses. The Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee being engaged in the business of export of computer software, has incurred an expenditure of Rs.2,86,68,68,261 in foreign currency towards technical services and also communication expenses of Rs.11

DCIT 22(3), Mumbai vs. Tech Mahindra Ltd, Mumbai

Appeal is dismissed and assessee's appeal is partly allowed

ITA 3531/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 92C(3)

Telecommunications, which is a venture partner and also the major customer of the assessee. The assessee is engaged in the business of development of computer software and other related services. The assessee filed the return of income for A.Y. 2007-08 on 29/10/2007 declaring a total income of Rs.23 ... turnover towards expenditure in foreign currency and telecommunication expenses. The Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee being engaged in the business of export of computer software, has incurred an expenditure of Rs.2,86,68,68,261 in foreign currency towards technical services and also communication expenses of Rs.11

DCIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi vs. Campus Eai India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 355/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40

technical services.” 3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in the business of computer software. The assessee filed its return of income on 07.10.2017 declaring income of Rs. 6,99,57,250/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny through CASS ... matter which needs to be looked into. The payment for development of mobile application is akin to payment for development / purchase of computer software- it would be relevant to look at the basis for treatment of payment for development of computer Software'. In order to treat the payment for development

Tech Mahindra Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 2(3), Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 9004/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Oct 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Hon'Ble

Section 10ASection 144C(5)Section 92C(3)

record written submission that it has not separately recovered any freight telecommunication charges or insurance attributable to the delivery of the article or computer software outside of India or expenses, if any incurred in foreign exchange in providing the technical services outside India from its customer. The assessee has also

E Service Singapore Pte Ltd., Gurugram vs. DCIT (International Taxation), New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in :

ITA 573/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: Shri Satyen Sethi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT- DR
Section 143(3)Section 9(1)(vi)

Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence Pvt. Ltd (supra), clearly held that the amounts paid by resident Indian end-users/distributors to non-resident computer software manufacturers/suppliers, as consideration for the resale/use of the computer software through EULAs/distribution agreements, is not the payment of royalty for the use of copyright ... computer software. 9.3. The jurisdictional Hon’ble High Court recently in the case of CIT (International Taxation) Vs. GRACEMAC CORPORATION {ITA No. 32/2022 decided on 07.03.2022} wherein, the Assessee was also holding the licensing of software products of „Microsoft company’ in the Territory of India and selling to its customers

E Service Singapore Pte Ltd., Gurugram vs. DCIT (International Taxation), New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in :

ITA 572/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: Shri Satyen Sethi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT- DR
Section 143(3)Section 9(1)(vi)

Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence Pvt. Ltd (supra), clearly held that the amounts paid by resident Indian end-users/distributors to non-resident computer software manufacturers/suppliers, as consideration for the resale/use of the computer software through EULAs/distribution agreements, is not the payment of royalty for the use of copyright ... computer software. 9.3. The jurisdictional Hon’ble High Court recently in the case of CIT (International Taxation) Vs. GRACEMAC CORPORATION {ITA No. 32/2022 decided on 07.03.2022} wherein, the Assessee was also holding the licensing of software products of „Microsoft company’ in the Territory of India and selling to its customers

Hp Services (Singapore) Pte Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT (International Taxation), New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in :

ITA 2142/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: Shri Satyen Sethi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT- DR
Section 143(3)Section 9(1)(vi)

Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence Pvt. Ltd (supra), clearly held that the amounts paid by resident Indian end-users/distributors to non-resident computer software manufacturers/suppliers, as consideration for the resale/use of the computer software through EULAs/distribution agreements, is not the payment of royalty for the use of copyright ... computer software. 9.3. The jurisdictional Hon’ble High Court recently in the case of CIT (International Taxation) Vs. GRACEMAC CORPORATION {ITA No. 32/2022 decided on 07.03.2022} wherein, the Assessee was also holding the licensing of software products of „Microsoft company’ in the Territory of India and selling to its customers