TELEFONICA DE ESPANA SA,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-2(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee stands partly allowed as indicated hereinabove

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(It)A Nos. 2657/Bang/2019, 180/Bang/2021 & 817/Bang/2022 Assessment Years : 2010-11 To 2012-13 M/S. Telefonica Depreciation Espana Sa, C/O. Bsr & Co.Llp, 3Rd Floor, Pebble The Acit(It)/Dcit(It), Beach, Circle – 2(2), Embassy Golf Links Bangalore. Business Park, Vs. Off Intermediate Ring Road, Bangalore – 560 071. Pan: Aahct0411G Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sharath Rao, Ca Revenue By : Shri D.K. Mishra, Cit Dr

Depreciation Espana SA, C/o. BSR & Co.LLP, 3rd Floor, Pebble The ACIT(IT)/DCIT(IT), Beach, Circle – 2(2), Embassy Golf Links Bangalore. Business Park, Vs. Off Intermediate Ring Road, Bangalore – 560 071. PAN: AAHCT0411G APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Sharath Rao, CA Revenue by : Shri D.K. Mishra, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 25-07-2023 Date of Pronouncement

GLOBE TELESERVICES LIMITED,HONG KONG vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE, BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee for both\nthe years under consideration stands partly allowed

section 9(1)(vi) for the IUC charges in great\ndetail:-\nVodafone Idea Limited (Earlier Known as `Vodafone South\nLimited') Which Now Stands Merged With 'Idea Cellular Ltd'.) ITA\nNo.160/2015 to 164/2015 and 64/2020 to 66/2020.\n[Karnataka High Court]\nHCG Global Communications Ltd. [2024] 158 taxmann.com 633\n[Bangalore — ITAT] [Entity based in Hong-Kong]\nOrange (formerly known

GLOBE TELESERVICES LIMITED,HONG KONG vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE, BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee for both\nthe years under consideration stands partly allowed

section 9(1)(vi) for the IUC charges in great\ndetail:-\n•\nVodafone Idea Limited (Earlier Known as `Vodafone South\nLimited') Which Now Stands Merged With 'Idea Cellular Ltd'.) ITA\nNo.160/2015 to 164/2015 and 64/2020 to 66/2020.\n[Karnataka High Court]\nHCG Global Communications Ltd. [2024] 158 taxmann.com 633\n[Bangalore — ITAT] [Entity based in Hong-Kong]\nOrange (formerly known

M/S VIDAL HEALTH INSURANCE TPA PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD) , BANGALORE

In the result appeals for A

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri. O.P. Meena

9(1)(vi) of A.Y: 2011 – 12 to 2014 – 15 the Act, and is liable to deduct TDS under section 194J of the Act. We therefore are in agreement with the view taken by Ld.CIT (A). Admittedly, assessee has not deducted TDS on payments made towards toll-free charges, and therefore, disallowance under section 40 (a) (ia) is warranted. However

M/S. COMMUNICATIONS GLOBAL NETWORK SERVICES LIMITED,UNITED KINGDOM vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE- 2(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuappeal No. Appellant Respondent It(It)A M/S. Communications Global The Deputy Commissioner Of No.89/Bang/2019 Network Services Limited, Income Tax 81, Newgate Street, London, (International Taxation), Assessment Year : Ec1A 7Aj, Circle – 2(1), 2009-10 United Kingdom. Bengaluru. Pan : Aagcc 9220 K It(It)A The Deputy Commissioner Of Nos.2218/Bang/2019, Income Tax 32/Bang/2021, -Do (International Taxation), 709/Bang/2022, Circle – 2(2), 165 To 167/Bang/2023 Bengaluru. Assessment Years : 2010-11 To 2015-16 Assessee By : Shri. T. Suryanarayana, Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar, Advocates Revenue By : Shri. Aseem Sharma, Cit(Dr), Itat, Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 28.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.08.2023

vi) of the Act does not in any manner alter the taxability of the receipts in the Assessee’s hands. It is submitted that once the conditions of ‘use of’ or ‘right to use’ are not satisfied, Explanations 5 and 6 cannot be pressed into service.  In any event, Explanation 5 has no application in the present case

COMMUNICATIONS GLOBAL NETWORK SERVICES LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-2(2), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuappeal No. Appellant Respondent It(It)A M/S. Communications Global The Deputy Commissioner Of No.89/Bang/2019 Network Services Limited, Income Tax 81, Newgate Street, London, (International Taxation), Assessment Year : Ec1A 7Aj, Circle – 2(1), 2009-10 United Kingdom. Bengaluru. Pan : Aagcc 9220 K It(It)A The Deputy Commissioner Of Nos.2218/Bang/2019, Income Tax 32/Bang/2021, -Do (International Taxation), 709/Bang/2022, Circle – 2(2), 165 To 167/Bang/2023 Bengaluru. Assessment Years : 2010-11 To 2015-16 Assessee By : Shri. T. Suryanarayana, Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar, Advocates Revenue By : Shri. Aseem Sharma, Cit(Dr), Itat, Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 28.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.08.2023

vi) of the Act does not in any manner alter the taxability of the receipts in the Assessee’s hands. It is submitted that once the conditions of ‘use of’ or ‘right to use’ are not satisfied, Explanations 5 and 6 cannot be pressed into service.  In any event, Explanation 5 has no application in the present case

M/S COMMUNICATIONS GLOBAL NETWORK SERVICES LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuappeal No. Appellant Respondent It(It)A M/S. Communications Global The Deputy Commissioner Of No.89/Bang/2019 Network Services Limited, Income Tax 81, Newgate Street, London, (International Taxation), Assessment Year : Ec1A 7Aj, Circle – 2(1), 2009-10 United Kingdom. Bengaluru. Pan : Aagcc 9220 K It(It)A The Deputy Commissioner Of Nos.2218/Bang/2019, Income Tax 32/Bang/2021, -Do (International Taxation), 709/Bang/2022, Circle – 2(2), 165 To 167/Bang/2023 Bengaluru. Assessment Years : 2010-11 To 2015-16 Assessee By : Shri. T. Suryanarayana, Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar, Advocates Revenue By : Shri. Aseem Sharma, Cit(Dr), Itat, Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 28.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.08.2023

vi) of the Act does not in any manner alter the taxability of the receipts in the Assessee’s hands. It is submitted that once the conditions of ‘use of’ or ‘right to use’ are not satisfied, Explanations 5 and 6 cannot be pressed into service.  In any event, Explanation 5 has no application in the present case

M/S WIPRO LTD,BANGALORE vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, all 6 appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

depreciation claimed on software imported for in house utilization and treated as part of block of assets should be allowed, despite the same being in the nature of royalty as per Explanation to section 9(1)(vi

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE vs. M/S. WIPRO LTD,, BANGALORE

In the result, all 6 appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

depreciation claimed on software imported for in house utilization and treated as part of block of assets should be allowed, despite the same being in the nature of royalty as per Explanation to section 9(1)(vi

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE vs. M/S. WIPRO LTD,, BANGALORE

In the result, all 6 appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

depreciation claimed on software imported for in house utilization and treated as part of block of assets should be allowed, despite the same being in the nature of royalty as per Explanation to section 9(1)(vi

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE vs. M/S. WIPRO LTD,, BANGALORE

In the result, all 6 appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

depreciation claimed on software imported for in house utilization and treated as part of block of assets should be allowed, despite the same being in the nature of royalty as per Explanation to section 9(1)(vi

M/S WIPRO LTD,BANGALORE vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, all 6 appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

depreciation claimed on software imported for in house utilization and treated as part of block of assets should be allowed, despite the same being in the nature of royalty as per Explanation to section 9(1)(vi

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE vs. M/S. WIPRO LTD,, BANGALORE

In the result, all 6 appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

depreciation claimed on software imported for in house utilization and treated as part of block of assets should be allowed, despite the same being in the nature of royalty as per Explanation to section 9(1)(vi

M/S WIPRO LTD,BANGALORE vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, all 6 appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

depreciation claimed on software imported for in house utilization and treated as part of block of assets should be allowed, despite the same being in the nature of royalty as per Explanation to section 9(1)(vi

M/S WIPRO LTD,BANGALORE vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, all 6 appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

depreciation claimed on software imported for in house utilization and treated as part of block of assets should be allowed, despite the same being in the nature of royalty as per Explanation to section 9(1)(vi

M/S WIPRO LTD,BANGALORE vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, all 6 appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

depreciation claimed on software imported for in house utilization and treated as part of block of assets should be allowed, despite the same being in the nature of royalty as per Explanation to section 9(1)(vi

M/S WIPRO LTD,BANGALORE vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, all 6 appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

depreciation claimed on software imported for in house utilization and treated as part of block of assets should be allowed, despite the same being in the nature of royalty as per Explanation to section 9(1)(vi

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE vs. M/S. WIPRO LTD,, BANGALORE

In the result, all 6 appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

depreciation claimed on software imported for in house utilization and treated as part of block of assets should be allowed, despite the same being in the nature of royalty as per Explanation to section 9(1)(vi

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE vs. M/S. WIPRO LTD,, BANGALORE

In the result, all 6 appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

depreciation claimed on software imported for in house utilization and treated as part of block of assets should be allowed, despite the same being in the nature of royalty as per Explanation to section 9(1)(vi