Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the lump sum payments made under the technology transfer agreement constituted royalty under Article VIIIA of the DTAA and were taxable in India, or whether they represented consideration for an outright transfer of ownership in technology and know-how.
Analysis: The agreement granted only a non-exclusive right to manufacture, use, maintain and sell the licensed products, while ownership and proprietary rights in the technology and technical information remained with the foreign licensor. The agreement imposed strict confidentiality obligations, restricted disclosure, preserved the licensor's control over improvements and patents, allowed quality control and inspection, and provided for reversion of rights on breach. These features showed that the assessee received permission to use the technology and know-how, not an absolute transfer of the underlying intellectual property. Lump sum payment does not take the receipt out of the royalty category where the real nature of the arrangement is a licence to use.
Conclusion: The payments were royalty and taxable in India under the DTAA. The issue was decided against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue.
Ratio Decidendi: Where an agreement grants only a restricted right to use technology or know-how, subject to confidentiality, control, and reversionary conditions, the consideration is royalty and not consideration for sale or absolute transfer of ownership.