← All Phrases

“Section 9(1)(11)”

Section References (mined)Section 9Section 9(1)(11)1 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 9(1)(11) is CIT v. Synopsis International Old Ltd. (212 Taxmann 454), cited in 177 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 9(1)(11)

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. HEG Ltd.
263 ITR 230 · 2003 · High Court
77
citing judgments

Payments made for mere information, not involving the imparting of secret, confidential, or specialized technical, industrial, commercial, or scientific knowledge, experience, or skill, do not qualify as 'royalty' under Section 9(1)(vi) of the Income Tax Act or relevant DTAA articles. Not every piece of commercial information constitutes royalty; expertise or skill in providing it is required.

CIT v. Wipro Ltd. (
70 Taxmann.com 129 · Reported
77
citing judgments

Payments are liable for deduction of tax at source when they are in the nature of royalty. The withholding tax liability can be worked out by applying a proportion to the total remittance.

EY Global Services Ltd. v. ACIT
441 ITR 54 · 2022 · High Court
72
citing judgments

Payments for software licenses that do not involve a transfer of copyright or proprietary interest, but merely authorize end-user access and use, do not constitute 'royalty' income. Additionally, IT support services are not taxable as Fees for Technical Services (FTS) or royalty.

ADIT(IT) v. Baan Global BV: 49 ITR(T) 73 (Mum)
317 ITR 169 · 2009 · Reported
70
citing judgments

Payments for the use of copyrighted articles, including computer software, constitute royalty income under Section 9(1)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, and are therefore subject to withholding tax under Section 195.

Marck Biosciences Ltd. v. ITO
164 ITD 205 · 2017 · ITAT
65
citing judgments

Payments for strategic counselling and advisory services are not royalty if they do not involve imparting information concerning industrial, commercial, or scientific experience, but rather are for business promotion, marketing, publicity, or financial advisory services.

CIT v. Shree Rajasthan Syntex Ltd.
313 ITR 231 · 2009 · High Court
55
citing judgments

This case establishes principles for distinguishing operating leases from finance leases and determining if leased equipment constitutes a Permanent Establishment (PE). It also clarifies that reassessment proceedings initiated on borrowed satisfaction without independent application of mind are invalid.

DIT v. Abbey Business Services Private Limited
122 Taxmann.com 174 · 2020 · High Court
46
citing judgments

Expenses incurred and reimbursed for seconded employees under a secondment agreement are not liable to tax deduction at source and do not constitute 'fees for technical services'. The secondment agreement itself forms an independent arrangement for securing services.

Judgments citing Section 9(1)(11)