← All Phrases

“Section 9(1)(vii)”

Section References (mined)Section 9Section 9(1)(vii)933 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 9(1)(vii) is Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence (P) Ltd. v. CIT (432 ITR 471), cited in 914 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 9(1)(vii)

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.

Ishikawajima Harima Heavy Industries Ltd. v. DIT
288 ITR 408 · 2007 · Supreme Court
394
citing judgments

Income from offshore supply of goods and services is not taxable in India if the entire transaction, including transfer of ownership and payments, occurs outside India.

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.

DIT v. New Skies Satellite BV
382 ITR 114 · 2016 · High Court
325
citing judgments

An amendment to the Income Tax Act, such as the Finance Act, 2012 amendment to Section 9(1)(vi) defining royalty, does not automatically override or alter the definition of 'royalty' as provided in a Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) unless the DTAA itself is bilaterally amended. The definition of royalty in a DTAA remains unaffected by unilateral changes to domestic law.

DIT v. Nokia Networks OY
358 ITR 259 · 2013 · High Court
276
citing judgments

Payments for the supply of software along with telecom equipment are not in the nature of royalty if they are for the use of a copyrighted article, not the copyright itself. Such payments are not taxable in India in the absence of a Permanent Establishment (PE).

CIT v. Toshoku Ltd.
125 ITR 525 · 1980 · Supreme Court
270
citing judgments

A non-resident commission agent is not chargeable to tax in India on commission income if no business operations are carried out in India. Consequently, no TDS is required under Section 195 on such payments.

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.

Judgments citing Section 9(1)(vii)

Shri Suresh George, Alappuzha vs. The ADIT International Taxation, Thiruvananthapuram-3, Thiruvanathapuram

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

ITA 794/COCH/2022[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin16 Jun 2023AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Aby T.Varkeysuresh George Asstt. Director Of Income Tax Kurichyiel House International Taxation Payippad, Harippad Vs. Thiruvananthapuram Alappuzha 690 556 [Pan:Affpg5853B]

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Kumar Verma, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 192Section 194JSection 9(1)Section 9(1)(vii)

India, so that irrespective of the situs of rendering services, his remuneration is deemed to accrue or arise in India in terms of section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act. That apart, it is also received in India. The assessee, further, having not been subject to tax under ... Suresh George vs. Asst. DIT India inasmuch as he is working for BSM, a resident company. The assessee, however, claims that section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act would not apply inasmuch as the remuneration received, despite being subject to TDS u/s. 194J

Lease Plan India P.Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-4(3), New Delhi

In the result, appeal is allowed

ITA 4714/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Billaiyaassessment Year: 2013-14 Lease Plan India P. Ltd., Versus Income-Tax Officer, C4C/332, Ground Floor, Ward 4(3), New Delhi. Janak Puri, New Delhi Pan: Aaacl6053B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Nikhil Gupta, Advocate & Sh. Rachit Abhishek, Advocate Revenue By : Sh. Hemant Gupta, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Sh. Nikhil Gupta, Advocate &For Respondent: Sh. Hemant Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 40Section 9Section 9(1)(vii)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHE ‘D’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K

DCIT 16(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Bsr and Co. LLP, Mumbai

In the result ITA No. 723/Mum/2023 is dismissed, ITA No

ITA 723/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Sh. Soumendu Kumar Das, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Sh. Ajit Kumar Jain CA &
Section 142(1)Section 40Section 90

purpose of earning income from a source outside India and hence, are not taxable in India pursuant to the provisions of Section 9(1) (vii) (b) of the IT Act. Ld. Counsel explained that the professional fees have been paid by the assessee, an India tax resident to KPMG Norway ... assessee for earning income from a source outside India i.e. from an overseas client. Thus the payment does not get covered under Section 9(1) (vii) of the IT Act in view of the exclusion pursuant to clause (b) of Section 9(1)(vii) of the Act. We further note

Country Inn & Suits by Raddison, Inn, Usa vs. ACIT, Circle 1(2) (1)International Taxation, Newdelhi

In the results, appeals are allowed as indicated above

ITA 2224/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Saktijit Dey

For Appellant: Sh. Pradeep Dinodia, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Bhuvnesh Kulshrestha, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

DTAA between India and USA or "fees for technical services" within the meaning given in Explanation 2 to section 9(1){vii). 73. In order to decide this issue relating to the applicability of Article 12(3)(a), 12(4)( a) or 12(4)(b) of the DTAA ... provisions of section 9(1)(vii) read with Explanation 2 to the payment received or receivable by the assessee from the Indian hotels/clients in pursuance of the agreements entered into with them, it is necessary to appreciate the exact nature of services rendered by the assessee as is evident from

Radisson Hotels International Incorporated, Usa vs. ACIT, Circle- 3(1)(2), International Taxation, Delhi

In the results, appeals are allowed as indicated above

ITA 2223/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Saktijit Dey

For Appellant: Sh. Pradeep Dinodia, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Bhuvnesh Kulshrestha, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

DTAA between India and USA or "fees for technical services" within the meaning given in Explanation 2 to section 9(1){vii). 73. In order to decide this issue relating to the applicability of Article 12(3)(a), 12(4)( a) or 12(4)(b) of the DTAA ... provisions of section 9(1)(vii) read with Explanation 2 to the payment received or receivable by the assessee from the Indian hotels/clients in pursuance of the agreements entered into with them, it is necessary to appreciate the exact nature of services rendered by the assessee as is evident from

Radisson Hotel International Incorporated, Usa vs. ACIT, Circle 3(1)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the results, appeals are allowed as indicated above

ITA 2222/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Saktijit Dey

For Appellant: Sh. Pradeep Dinodia, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Bhuvnesh Kulshrestha, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

DTAA between India and USA or "fees for technical services" within the meaning given in Explanation 2 to section 9(1){vii). 73. In order to decide this issue relating to the applicability of Article 12(3)(a), 12(4)( a) or 12(4)(b) of the DTAA ... provisions of section 9(1)(vii) read with Explanation 2 to the payment received or receivable by the assessee from the Indian hotels/clients in pursuance of the agreements entered into with them, it is necessary to appreciate the exact nature of services rendered by the assessee as is evident from

Infobip Limited, United Kingdom vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle Int. Tax. 2(1)(1), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 820/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 May 2023AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Ms. Bhavya Bansal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vizay Vasanta, CIT- DR
Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 92C

agree that even if the above services are considered to the FTS being technical, managerial and consultancy services as per the provisions of section 9(1)(vii) of the Act, these services will not fall within the meaning of FTS under Article 13(4) of the India-UK DTAA

Owens Corning (Singapore) Pvt Limited, Mumbai vs. The Dy Comm of Income Tax (International Tax), Circle -3(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 377/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 May 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleowens Corning Inc., Dy.Cit C/O-Owens Corning (International Tax), बनाम/ (India) Pvt. Ltd., 7Th Circle-3(2)(2), Vs. Floor, Alpha Building Air India Building, Hiranandani Gardens Nariman Point, Powai, Mumbai-400076. Mumbai-400021. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaco3242R (""थ" / Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) अपीलाथ" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Sandeep Bhalla.Ar ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing 10/05/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 22/05/2023 आदेश / Order Per Pavan Kumar Gadale - Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of Assessing Officer (“Ao”) Passed Under Section 143(3)R.W.S144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) In Pursuance To The Directions Of Ld. Dispute Resolution Panel (“Drp”) U/S 144C(5) Of The Act Dated 28.11.2022. 2. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal:- 1.0 “Re: Treating Fabrication Charges Received As 'Fees For Technical Services': 1

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Bhalla.ARFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash.DR
Section 115ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 234BSection 9(1)(vii)Section 90(2)

during the year under consideration by treating the same as 'fees for technical services' in terms of section 9(1)(vii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 as well as Article 12 of the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement entered between India and Singapore ("India-Singapore Tax Treaty"). 1.2 The Appellant ... assessee's receipts as FTS as per Article-12(4)(a) of the DTAA between India and Singapore. Consequently taxed the same under section 9(1)(vii) of the I.T. Act read with Article-12(4)(a) of the DTAA between India and Singapore and made addition of Rs.15

Sulzer Pumps India P. Ltd., Navi Mumbai vs. Addl./Jt/Dy/ Asstt/ ITO, National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 810/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Sulzer Pumps India Pvt Ltd V. Addl./Joint/Dy./Acit/Ito Plot No. 9, Midc, Digha National E-Assessment Centre Delhi Thane-Belapur Road, Navi Mumbai- 400708 Pan: Aaack2238F (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Sulzer Pumps India Pvt Ltd V. National Faceless Assessment Centre Delhi Plot No. 9, Midc, Digha Thane-Belapur Road Navi Mumbai- 400708 Pan: Aaack2238F (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 144C(5)Section 37(1)Section 40

ascertained liability. The learned Assessing Officer further noted that no tax has deducted at source on such expenditure under Section 195 read with section 9(1)(vii) of the Act, the disallowance of ₹3,73,10,068/- was made. We find that assessee is engaged in manufacturing and sale ... warranty expenditure relates to services utilized in business carried out by the assessee outside India and thereby it falls into the exclusion under Section 9(1) (vii) (b) of the Act from the definition of income of fees for technical services. He submitted that assessee export goods manufactured

Owens Corning Inc., Mumbai vs. The Dy Comm of Income Tax (International Tax), Circle -3(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 376/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 May 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

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

treated the said receipts as royalty in terms of Article 12(3) of the DTAA between India and USA and as per section 9(1)(vii) read with Explanation 5 of the Income-tax Act and brought it to tax accordingly. The assessee, on the other hand, maintains that

Murex Southeast Asia Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Comm. of Income Tax (It) 3(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, this issue is passed in favour of the assessee

ITA 2338/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 May 2023AY 2018-19
Section 143(3)Section 9(1)(vii)

considered as ‘Fees for included services’. Thus, AO held that, not only its fees for technical services under the provision of Section 9(1)(vii) but also falls in the ambit 4 M/s. Murex Southeast Asia Pvt. Ltd. of Article 12(4) of India-Singapore DTAA. Accordingly, he taxed amount

Goldman Sachs & Co., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT (International Taxation)-2(3)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 1264/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 234A

services are in the nature of FTS, the same were subjected to tax at the rate of 10% as per the provisions of section 9(1)(vii) r/w section 115A of the Act. The assessee further submitted that GSSPL‟s new campus is being constructed by a third-party developer

Goldman Sachs & Co., Mumbai vs. DCIT- 2(3)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 6005/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 234A

services are in the nature of FTS, the same were subjected to tax at the rate of 10% as per the provisions of section 9(1)(vii) r/w section 115A of the Act. The assessee further submitted that GSSPL‟s new campus is being constructed by a third-party developer

Goldman Sachs & Co, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It)-2(3)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 7490/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 234A

services are in the nature of FTS, the same were subjected to tax at the rate of 10% as per the provisions of section 9(1)(vii) r/w section 115A of the Act. The assessee further submitted that GSSPL‟s new campus is being constructed by a third-party developer

Goldman Sachs & Company, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation) 2(3)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 401/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 234A

services are in the nature of FTS, the same were subjected to tax at the rate of 10% as per the provisions of section 9(1)(vii) r/w section 115A of the Act. The assessee further submitted that GSSPL‟s new campus is being constructed by a third-party developer

ACIT Circle-25(1), New Delhi vs. Red Ice Production Pvt Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 8061/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40Section 9Section 9(1)(vii)

treated the payment of Rs. 1,58,85,633/- made outside India as Fee for Technical Services (FTS) as defined under section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act. The submissions of the assessee are incorporated in para 4.1 of the appellate order ... foreign service providers thus were not in the nature of fees for Technical Services within the meaning of Explanation 2 to section 9(1)(vii) and the same were not chargeable to tax in India. The assessee, therefore, was not required to deduct tax at source from the payments made

I.A.R. Systems Aktiebolag, Mumbai vs. DCIT(It)-2(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 598/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 144C(5)Section 9(1)(vi)

above chart, Ld. DRP held that the above receipts are chargeable to tax under Fee for Technical Services (in short “FTS”) as per section 9(1)(vii) of the Act and as per India-Sweden DTAA article 12(3)(b). Page No. | 10 ITA NO.598 & 1850/MUM/2022

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (It)-3(2)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Marriott International Design & Construction Services Inc., Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the Assessing Officer is thus dismissed

ITA 2977/MUM/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bledcit (It) – 3(2)(1) V. M/S. Marriott International Design Room No. 1632, 16Th Floor & Construction Services Inc., Air India Building, Nariman Point C/O. Marriot Hotels India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai – 400 021 303A, 304, Fulcrum B-Wing, Hiranandani Business Park Mumbai, Sahar Road Andheri (E) - 400099 Pan: Aagcm5401Q (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No. 01/Mum/2023 [Arising Out Of Ita No. 2977/Mum/2022 (A.Y: 2018-19)] M/S. Marriott International Design V. Dcit (It) – 3(2)(1) & Construction Services Inc., Room No. 1632, 16Th Floor C/O. Marriot Hotels India Pvt. Ltd., Air India Building 303A, 304, Fulcrum Nariman Point B-Wing, Hiranandani Business Park Mumbai – 400 021 Mumbai, Sahar Road Andheri (E) - 400099 Pan: Aagcm5401Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Paras Savla Department Represented By : Shri Kunal Haver

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “I”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI

Expeditors International of Washington, Usa vs. ACIT, Circle 1(2)(2), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 355/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 May 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Khare, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vizay Vasanta, CIT- DR
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 234BSection 270ASection 9(1)(vi)Section 9(1)(vii)

services rendered outside India, is in the nature of Fee for Technical Services/Fee for Included Services ("FTS'/ "FIS") as per the provisions of section 9(1)(vii) of the Act and Article 12 of the India-USA Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement ("DTAA"). 3. That ... received by the Appellant from Expeditors International (India) Private Limited (EI India) is in nature of FTS/ FIS as per the provisions of section 9(1)(vii) of the Act and Article 12 of the India-USA DTAA. 4. That the AO and the Ld. DRP, on the facts

Sunbeam Auto Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 235/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Apr 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Dble & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year: 2011-12 Sunbeam Auto Ltd. Vs. Addl. Cit, S-323, Panchsheel Park, Range-9, New Delhi 110 017 New Delhi. Pan Aabcs2948F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Addl. Cit Vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd. Special Range-8, S-323, Panchsheel Park, Room No. 199A, New Delhi 110 017 C.R. Building, Pan Aabcs2948F New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sunbeam Auto Ltd. Vs. Dcit, S-323, Panchsheel Park, Circle-24(2) New Delhi 110 017 New Delhi. Pan Aabcs2948F (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Shashi M Kapila, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Umesh Takyar, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 264Section 37(1)Section 40Section 43(1)

assessee held that the services provided by the said parties fall within the purview of Fees for Technical Services (“FTS”) as per section 9(1)(vii) of the Act and Fees for Included Services (“FIS”) as per Article 12(4) of India-USA Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (“India-USA DTAA ... also for enduring benefits to assessee’s business. Thus soliciting of business orders is only a small part of it. As per section 9(1)(vii) ‘Fee for Technical Services’ (FTS) means any consideration received for rendering of any technical, managerial or consultancy services. As per the agreement