← 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)

Cognizant Technology Solutions India Private Limited, Chennai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle 1(1), Chennai

ITA 1205/CHNY/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT
Section 10ASection 144ASection 14ASection 40Section 9(1)

services rendered by the non-resident vendors would fall within the purview of the exclusionary clause provided in section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act, as the payments made by the assessee (a resident) are utilized to earn income from a source outside India as the Company ... payees(supra) are not Singaporean entities. Coming to its argument that the annual maintenance charges amount to ‘technical services’ within the meaning of section 9(1)(vii), go against the case law of GE India Technology Centre Pvt. Ltd vs CIT 327 ITR 465 holding that section 195 applies only

Cognizant Technology Solutions India Private Limited, Chennai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle 1(1), Chennai

ITA 1194/CHNY/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT
Section 10ASection 144ASection 14ASection 40Section 9(1)

services rendered by the non-resident vendors would fall within the purview of the exclusionary clause provided in section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act, as the payments made by the assessee (a resident) are utilized to earn income from a source outside India as the Company ... payees(supra) are not Singaporean entities. Coming to its argument that the annual maintenance charges amount to ‘technical services’ within the meaning of section 9(1)(vii), go against the case law of GE India Technology Centre Pvt. Ltd vs CIT 327 ITR 465 holding that section 195 applies only

Cognizant Technology Solutions India Private Limited, Chennai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle 1(1), Chennai

ITA 1193/CHNY/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 May 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1193, 1194, 1205, 1206 & 1207/Chny/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Vs Cognizant Technology Solutions The Asst. Commissioner India Pvt. Ltd., Of Income Tax, No.5/535, Okkiam Thoraipakkam, Central Circle 1(1), Old Mahabalipuram Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 096. Pan : Aaacd 3312M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1262, 1263, 1264, 1265 & 1266/Chny/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Vs The Asst. Commissioner Of Cognizant Technology Income Tax, Solutions India Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle 1(1), No.5/535, Okkiam Chennai. Thoraipakkam, Old Mahabalipuram Road, Chennai – 600 096. Pan : Aaacd 3312M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT
Section 10ASection 14ASection 40Section 9(1)

services rendered by the non-resident vendors would fall within the purview of the exclusionary clause provided in section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act, as the payments made by the assessee (a resident) are utilized to earn income from a source outside India as the Company ... payees(supra) are not Singaporean entities. Coming to its argument that the annual maintenance charges amount to ‘technical services’ within the meaning of section 9(1)(vii), go against the case law of GE India Technology Centre Pvt. Ltd vs CIT 327 ITR 465 holding that section 195 applies only

Hcl Software Products Limited, Delhi vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 11(1), Delhi

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

ITA 2704/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Aditya Vohra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Tanay Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 195Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

required. It also submitted that the services were utilised for earning income from a source outside India and hence, the exclusions provided in section 9(1)(vii)(b) and Article 12(3)(g) of India Australia DTAA would apply. After considering the above, he held that the services provided ... 1 was, even otherwise, not chargeable to tax in India in the hands of the non-resident recipient in terms of section 9(1 )(vii)(b) and therefore, did not require deduction of tax at source under section 195 of the Act. Incorrect levy of interest 5. That

Michael Page International Pte Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation ) -3(2)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 1427/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 May 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailshri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Ms. Hirali DesaiFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(13)Section 234BSection 270A

wherein the similar addition was made, assessed the income earned by the assessee from the rendition of management support services as FTS under section 9(1)(vii) read with Article 12(4) of the India-Singapore DTAA. 7. The assessee filed detailed objections against the addition made ... learned DRP, the AO vide impugned final assessment order dated 09/12/2024, assessed the income received from rendering management support services as FTS under section 9(1)(vii) read with Article 12(4) of the India-Singapore DTAA. Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us. 9. During the hearing

Owens Corning (Singapore) Pte Ltd, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Tax ) Circle -3(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1238/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 May 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhailowens Corning (Singapore) Pte Ltd., C/O Owens Corning (India) Pvt. Ltd., 7Th Floor, Alpha Building, Hiranandani Gardens, Powai ............... Appellant Maharashtra - 400076 Pan : Aabco5666L V/S Dcit (It) – 3(2)(2) 6Th Floor, Kautilya Bhawan, ……………… Respondent Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai - 400051

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep BhallaFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash, Sr.DR
Section 115ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 234BSection 9Section 9(1)(vii)Section 90(2)

assessee’s appeal, pertains to the taxability of the fabrication charges received by the assessee as Fees for Technical Services (“FTS”) under section 9(1)(vii) of the Act as well as Article 12 of the India-Singapore Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (“DTAA”). 4. The brief facts of the case ... taxable as FTS, held that the fabrication charges received by the assessee from its Indian associated enterprise is taxable as FTS under section 9(1)(vii) read with Article 12(4) of the India-Singapore DTAA. 6. The assessee filed detailed objections against the addition made by the AO. Vide

Atul Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 38/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2017-18 Atul Limited Acit, Cir.1(1)(1) Atul House, Gi Patel Mark Vs Ahmedabad. Mithila Society, Ahmedabad. Pan : Aabca 2390 M (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Shri Bandish Soparkar, Ar : Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01/05/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 08/05/2025 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, AR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 35Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)Section 92C

source on payments made to foreign parties for product testing services, treating such payments as fees for technical services under section 9(1)(vii) of the Act. 5. Being aggrieved by the additions and disallowances confirmed by the Assessing Officer in pursuance of the DRP’s directions, the assessee ... facts in confirming addition of Rs.3,99,455/- of testing charges u/s 195 for non-deduction of TDS by invoking Explanation 2 to Section 9(1)(vii) of the Act considering same as "fees for technical services" ignoring fact that said testing were done out of India and payee does

Kony Inc, United States of America vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation 1(2), Chennai, Tamil Nadu

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the stay petition filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 185/CHNY/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 May 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Shri R. Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri V. Justin, CIT
Section 143(2)Section 4

receipts from annual maintenance charges of the software are in the nature of FIS/FTS, both under the tax treaty as well as under section 9(1)(vii) of the Act. Accordingly, he brought to tax the amount of Rs.1,23,20,383/-. Learned DRP, while deciding the objections ... from annual maintenance charges is in the nature of FIS under Article 12(4)(a) of India – USA DTAA as well as under section 9(1)(vii) of the Act. However, while deciding the issue of taxability of receipts from granting of licence, we have held that they

DCIT (International Taxation), Circle-I, Dehradun vs. Halliburton Offshore Services Inc., Dehradun

ITA 6714/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun07 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Kapoor, Sh. S. LalchandaniFor Respondent: Sh. Mithun Shete, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 44BSection 44DSection 9(1)(i)Section 9(1)(vii)

construction, assembly, mining or like project and had only provided ancillary services, and thus did not fall in the exclusion clause of section 9(1)(vii) of the Act, in distinction to the lead case of Foramer inter alia covered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in ONGC case supra ... being prospecting, extraction or production of mineral oil, the ancillary ’ works were held to be covered by the exclusion provided in Explanation to section 9(1)(vii) of the Act. (vi) Whether the CIT (A) has erred in overlooking that the receipts of the assessee were not only

DCIT (International Taxation), Circle-I, Dehradun vs. Halliburton Offshore Services Inc., Dehradun

ITA 6171/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun07 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Kapoor, Sh. S. LalchandaniFor Respondent: Sh. Mithun Shete, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 44BSection 44DSection 9(1)(i)Section 9(1)(vii)

construction, assembly, mining or like project and had only provided ancillary services, and thus did not fall in the exclusion clause of section 9(1)(vii) of the Act, in distinction to the lead case of Foramer inter alia covered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in ONGC case supra ... being prospecting, extraction or production of mineral oil, the ancillary ’ works were held to be covered by the exclusion provided in Explanation to section 9(1)(vii) of the Act. (vi) Whether the CIT (A) has erred in overlooking that the receipts of the assessee were not only

Halliburton Offshore Services Inc., Noida vs. DCIT (International Taxation), Circle-1, Dehradun

ITA 6026/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun07 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Kapoor, Sh. S. LalchandaniFor Respondent: Sh. Mithun Shete, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 44BSection 44DSection 9(1)(i)Section 9(1)(vii)

construction, assembly, mining or like project and had only provided ancillary services, and thus did not fall in the exclusion clause of section 9(1)(vii) of the Act, in distinction to the lead case of Foramer inter alia covered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in ONGC case supra ... being prospecting, extraction or production of mineral oil, the ancillary ’ works were held to be covered by the exclusion provided in Explanation to section 9(1)(vii) of the Act. (vi) Whether the CIT (A) has erred in overlooking that the receipts of the assessee were not only

Ntt Docomo, Inc., Mumbai vs. ACIT (International Taxation), Circle-3(3)(1)

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed on legal grounds

ITA 2736/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 9(1)(vii)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘I’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT

ACIT, Circle- II, International Taxation, Dehradun vs. Weatherford Oil Tools M.E. Ltd., Dehradun

ITA 5696/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun28 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Kapoor, Sh. Anil ChachraFor Respondent: Sh. Mithun Shete, Sr. DR
Section 1Section 92D

mineral oil shall fall within the purview of S.44 BB and outside the purview of fees for technical services as defined in Section 9(1)(vii) of the Act. He also brought it to our notice that in the assessment order for the Asstt. Year 2014-15, learned

Weatherford Oil Tools Me Ltd., Dehradun vs. ACIT, Circle- II, International Taxation, Dehradun

ITA 5647/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun28 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Kapoor, Sh. Anil ChachraFor Respondent: Sh. Mithun Shete, Sr. DR
Section 1Section 92D

mineral oil shall fall within the purview of S.44 BB and outside the purview of fees for technical services as defined in Section 9(1)(vii) of the Act. He also brought it to our notice that in the assessment order for the Asstt. Year 2014-15, learned

ACIT, Circle- II, International Taxation, Dehradun vs. Weatherford Oil Tools M.E. Ltd., Dehradun

ITA 417/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun28 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Kapoor, Sh. Anil ChachraFor Respondent: Sh. Mithun Shete, Sr. DR
Section 1Section 92D

mineral oil shall fall within the purview of S.44 BB and outside the purview of fees for technical services as defined in Section 9(1)(vii) of the Act. He also brought it to our notice that in the assessment order for the Asstt. Year 2014-15, learned

Weatherford Oil Tools M.E. Ltd., Noida vs. DCIT, Circle- 2, International Taxation, Dehradun

ITA 7848/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun28 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Kapoor, Sh. Anil ChachraFor Respondent: Sh. Mithun Shete, Sr. DR
Section 1Section 92D

mineral oil shall fall within the purview of S.44 BB and outside the purview of fees for technical services as defined in Section 9(1)(vii) of the Act. He also brought it to our notice that in the assessment order for the Asstt. Year 2014-15, learned

ACIT, Circle- II, International Taxation, Dehradun vs. Weatherford Oil Tools Me Ltd., Dehradun

ITA 7477/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun28 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Kapoor, Sh. Anil ChachraFor Respondent: Sh. Mithun Shete, Sr. DR
Section 1Section 92D

mineral oil shall fall within the purview of S.44 BB and outside the purview of fees for technical services as defined in Section 9(1)(vii) of the Act. He also brought it to our notice that in the assessment order for the Asstt. Year 2014-15, learned

Weatherford Oil Tools M E Ltd., Dehradun vs. DCIT, Circle- 2, Intl. Taxation, Dehradun

ITA 7334/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun28 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Kapoor, Sh. Anil ChachraFor Respondent: Sh. Mithun Shete, Sr. DR
Section 1Section 92D

mineral oil shall fall within the purview of S.44 BB and outside the purview of fees for technical services as defined in Section 9(1)(vii) of the Act. He also brought it to our notice that in the assessment order for the Asstt. Year 2014-15, learned

Aban Offshore Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Intl, Tax 1(1), Chennai

ITA 1240/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T.Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S.R. Raghunatha, Hon'Bleआयकर अपीलसं./Ita Nos.: 1240/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Aban Offshore Limited, 113, Janpriya Crest, Pantheon Road, Egmore, Chennai - 600 008. Pan: Aaaca 3012H (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/Appellant By प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. International Taxation 1(1), Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca (Through Virtual Mode) : Ms. R. Anita, Addl.Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19.02.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28.04.2025 आदेश /O R Der Per S. R. Raghunatha: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Filed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Chennai-16, Dated 13.03.2024 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: 1. The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Not Considering The Fact That The Order Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Dated 13.03.2024 Is Erroneous Both On Facts & In Law To The Extent The Order Is Prejudicial To The Interest Of The Appellant :-2-:

Section 115ASection 195(2)Section 250Section 44BSection 9(1)Section 9(1)(vi)Section 90

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, 'सी' न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'C' BENCH, CHENNAI श्री एबी टी. वर्की, न्यायिक

Shell International B.V., Netherlands vs. The Asstt.CIT., Circle(Intnl.Taxn.)-1, Ahmedabad

In the result, we hold that the above services did not qualify as FTS under the

ITA 1027/AHD/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Apr 2025AY 2021-22
Section 143Section 153

that CHR Recruitment Fees, External Information Services (license for online databases) and IT Migration Support Services qualify as fee for technical services under Section 9(1)(vii) of the Act read with Article 12 of Tax Treaty. 19. We shall first briefly discuss the nature of services performed ... very broad connotation and it has been used elsewhere in the Statute also so widely as to comprehend professional services : vide Section 9(1) (vii) ". The relevant meanings of the word 'technical' given in the New Shorter Oxford Dictionary (Thumb Index Edition) are 1. Of a person: having knowledge