Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Tribunal rules in favor of assessee on taxability of software license fees and IT support payments.</h1> <h3>John Deere India Pvt. Limited Versus The Dy. Director of Income Tax, (International Taxation) -1, Pune.</h3> The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, holding that payments made to Deere & Co. USA for software license fees and IT support services were not ... Failure to deduct TDS - assessee in default - payment of tax and interest received u/s 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Act on account of non-deduction of tax on the payments made by the assessee to Deere & Co., USA - AO was of the view that the payments made by the assessee were liable to tax as it was in the nature of royalty / FTS as per Section 9(1)(vi) & 9(1)(vii) of the I.T. Act as well as Article 12 of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) between India & USA - HELD THAT:- An identical issue arose in assessee’s own case in JOHN DEERE INDIA PVT. LTD., (JOHN DEERE EQUIPMENT MERGED WITH JOHN DEERE INDIA PVT. LTD.) VERSUS THE DY. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) –1, PUNE [2019 (3) TMI 458 - ITAT PUNE] wherein the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal has held that assessee is not liable to deduct the TDS on the payment. No material has been placed by Revenue to demonstrate that the order of Tribunal in assessee’s own case for A.Ys. 2007-08 and 2008-09 has been set aside / stayed by higher Judicial Forum. Revenue has also not pointed out any distinguishing feature in the facts of the present case and in the case of assessee’s own case in earlier years - the assessee has not defaulted in deduction of TDS on the impugned payments made. The order of AO passed u/s 201(1) / 201(1A) of the Act is set aside - appeal of the assessee allowed. Issues Involved:1. Deduction of TDS on payments made to Deere & Co. USA for software license fees and IT support services.2. Classification of payments as 'Royalty' or 'Fees for Technical Services' under the Income Tax Act and DTAA.3. Reimbursement of expenses and whether TDS is required on such reimbursements.4. Lease line charges and their classification under the DTAA and Income Tax Act.5. Training fees and whether they constitute fees for technical services.6. Reimbursement of salary paid to expatriate employees and whether it constitutes fees for technical services.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Deduction of TDS on payments made to Deere & Co. USA for software license fees and IT support services:The Assessee argued that the payments made to Deere & Co. USA for software license fees and IT support services were not taxable under the Income Tax Act or the DTAA as 'Royalty.' The AO held that the payments were liable to tax and the assessee should have deducted TDS. The Tribunal referred to its decision in the assessee's own case for A.Ys. 2007-08 and 2008-09, where it was held that the purchase of software being a copyrighted article was not covered by the term 'royalty' under section 9(1)(vi) of the Act.2. Classification of payments as 'Royalty' or 'Fees for Technical Services' under the Income Tax Act and DTAA:The Tribunal noted that the payments for software and IT support services did not fall under the definition of 'royalty' or 'fees for technical services' as per the DTAA between India and USA. The Tribunal emphasized that the definition of 'royalty' under the DTAA had not been amended and thus, the payments made for the purchase of software did not require TDS deduction.3. Reimbursement of expenses and whether TDS is required on such reimbursements:The Assessee contended that the payments made were reimbursements and hence, no TDS was required. The Tribunal upheld that lease line charges and other related expenses were reimbursements and not liable for TDS deduction, aligning with its previous ruling in the assessee's own case.4. Lease line charges and their classification under the DTAA and Income Tax Act:The Tribunal held that lease line charges paid to Deere & Co. USA were not in the nature of 'royalty' and did not involve the transfer of technical services. Therefore, the assessee was not required to deduct TDS on these payments. This decision was consistent with the Tribunal's earlier findings in the assessee's case for previous years.5. Training fees and whether they constitute fees for technical services:The Tribunal noted that the training fees paid for web-based training did not make available any technical knowledge or services. Therefore, these payments did not constitute fees for technical services under Article 12 of the DTAA between India and USA. Consequently, no TDS was required on such payments.6. Reimbursement of salary paid to expatriate employees and whether it constitutes fees for technical services:The Tribunal held that the reimbursement of salary paid to expatriate employees did not constitute fees for technical services. The expatriate employees were on the rolls of the appellant company, and TDS was already deducted under section 192 for the salary paid. Thus, there was no requirement for additional TDS deduction on these reimbursements.Conclusion:The Tribunal concluded that the assessee had not defaulted in deducting TDS on the impugned payments made to Deere & Co. USA. The order of the AO passed under sections 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Act was set aside, and the grounds of the assessee were allowed. The appeal of the assessee was thus allowed in favor of the assessee.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found