Payments for custom machinery design not 'royalty' under section 9(1)(vi) or 9(1)(vii), treated as contract price

HC held that payments made by the assessee to a non-resident for design and engineering of tailor-made machinery did not constitute "royalty" under section 9(1)(vi) or 9(1)(vii). The court found no transfer or licence of any patent, invention, model or design and the information supplied was incidental to manufacture and maintenance. Consequently, the amounts formed part of the contract price and did not accrue or arise in India as income of the foreign supplier. Decision for the assessee against the Revenue.

---

---

Issues Involved:
The judgment addresses the taxation implications of payments made by an assessee to a foreign contractor for design and engineering services in a contract related to the supply of machinery.

Summary:

Issue 1: Tax Deduction on Payments for Design and Engineering Services
The assessee, engaged in lignite mining, entered into a contract with a Hungarian company for the supply of steam generating plants. The Income-tax Officer required the assessee to deduct tax at source on payments for design and engineering services under section 195 of the Act. The Commissioner and the Tribunal held that these payments did not constitute royalty or income accruing to the foreign supplier in India, thus not subject to tax deduction.

Issue 2: Interpretation of Royalty under Section 9(1)(vi) of the Act
Section 9(1)(vi) of the Act defines royalty and deems certain income to arise in India. The Tribunal determined that the payments for design and engineering services did not fall within the definition of royalty as per Explanation 2 of the Act. The contract did not involve the transfer of rights or licensing of patents, inventions, or designs, making the payments exempt from tax deduction.

Issue 3: Nature of Payments for Design and Engineering
The contract between the assessee and the Hungarian company did not include specific patents for exploitation by the buyer. The payments made were part of the total contract price covering various stages from design to commissioning, not constituting royalty under section 9(1)(vi) or 9(1)(vii) of the Act. The Tribunal correctly concluded that the design and engineering payments were not taxable as royalty income.

In conclusion, the High Court ruled in favor of the assessee, stating that the payments for design and engineering services to the Hungarian company were not subject to tax deduction as royalty income. The assessee was awarded costs amounting to Rs. 2,000.

---