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.
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>Software Sales Not Taxable as Royalty: Tribunal Rules in Favor of Assessee</h1> <h3>Comptel Oyj Versus ADIT, Circle-1 (1), International Taxation, New Delhi</h3> The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeals for the assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09, and 2009-10, holding that receipts from the sale of software are ... Receipts from transfer of shrink wrapped software - whether amount to business income or royalty under section 9(1) (vi) and DTAA - Held that:- Terms and conditions of software license in the decision before honorable Delhi high court in Director of Income Tax Versus Infrasoft Ltd. [2013 (11) TMI 1382 - DELHI HIGH COURT] and in the impugned case before us. We found them similar to the issue decided by honourabel Delhi High court. They are similar as to non-exclusive, non-transferable and user restrictions of the software i.e. the software has to be used in accordance with the Agreement, all the intellectual property rights in the form of patent, copyright, trademark etc. are the property of the seller only and at no point of time same has been transferred to either the buyer/ customer, the rights acquired in relation to the copyright are limited to those necessary to enable the user to operate the program, for example, where the transferee is granted limited rights to reproduce the program. The Agreement categorically restricts the user to copy, publish, display, disclose, modify, merge etc. the software except for archival purposes and not allowed to exploit the computer software commercially. On identical facts and circumstances, honourable Delhi high court has held that what is transferred is neither the copyright in the software nor the use of the copyright in the software, but what is transferred is the right to use the copyrighted material or article, which is clearly distinct from the rights in a copyright. The right that is transferred is not a right to use the copyright but is only limited to the right to use the copyrighted material and the same does not give rise to any royalty income and would be chargeable to tax as business income. Therefore respectfully following the decision of Honourable Delhi high court we hold that that consideration received by the assessee on sale of software is not chargeable to tax as royalty such as equipment royalty, process royalty etc. Under Article 12 of DTAA but as business income under article 7 of the INDO Finland DTAA. - Decided in favour of assessee. Issues Involved:1. Validity of the assessment orders under section 143(3) read with section 144C of the Income-tax Act, 1961.2. Classification of receipts from the sale of 'standard software' as royalty under section 9(1)(vi) of the Income-tax Act and Article 13(3) of the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) between India and Finland.3. Classification of ancillary services provided along with the sale of software as fees for technical services under Article 13(4) of the DTAA.4. Non-allowance of TDS credit.5. Incorrect application of conversion rates.6. Incorrect application of tax rates under section 115A of the Act.7. Levying of interest under sections 234A and 234B of the Act.Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis:1. Validity of the Assessment Orders:The assessee challenged the validity of the assessment orders passed under section 143(3) read with section 144C of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal noted that the facts, assessment orders, and orders of the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) for all the assessment years (2007-08, 2008-09, and 2009-10) were similar. The Tribunal decided to first address the appeal for the assessment year 2007-08 and then follow the same reasoning for the subsequent years.2. Classification of Receipts from Sale of 'Standard Software' as Royalty:The primary issue was whether the receipts from the sale of 'standard software' should be classified as royalty under section 9(1)(vi) of the Income-tax Act and Article 13(3) of the DTAA between India and Finland. The Tribunal analyzed the nature of the software and the agreements involved. The software was found to be 'standard software' used for specific purposes in the telecom industry. The Tribunal referred to the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of DIT vs. Infrasoft Ltd, which held that receipts from the transfer of shrink-wrapped software are not taxable as royalty. The Tribunal concluded that the consideration received by the assessee on the sale of software is not chargeable to tax as royalty but as business income under Article 7 of the DTAA.3. Classification of Ancillary Services as Fees for Technical Services:The assessee contended that the ancillary services provided along with the sale of software were inextricably linked to the sale of software and should not be classified as fees for technical services under Article 13(4) of the DTAA. The Tribunal agreed with the assessee's contention, noting that the services were ancillary and subsidiary to the sale of software and thus fell within the exclusion clause of Article 13(5)(a) of the DTAA.4. Non-allowance of TDS Credit:The assessee argued that the TDS credit was not allowed despite the payments being received on a net-of-tax basis. The Tribunal set aside this issue to the Assessing Officer (AO) with a direction to grant credit for TDS if found in accordance with the law.5. Incorrect Application of Conversion Rates:The assessee contended that the AO applied incorrect conversion rates on the grossed-up amount of USD receipts. The Tribunal did not specifically address this issue in detail but implied that it would be consequential to the main issues decided.6. Incorrect Application of Tax Rates under Section 115A:The assessee argued that the AO applied a tax rate of 15% on all receipts without considering the agreements entered with Vodafone Essar and Idea Cellular, which were post-June 2005 and should be taxed at 10% under section 115A of the Act. The Tribunal did not specifically address this issue in detail but implied that it would be consequential to the main issues decided.7. Levying of Interest under Sections 234A and 234B:The assessee challenged the levy of interest under sections 234A and 234B of the Act. The Tribunal did not specifically address this issue in detail but implied that it would be consequential to the main issues decided.Conclusion:The Tribunal allowed the appeals of the assessee for all three assessment years (2007-08, 2008-09, and 2009-10) by holding that the receipts from the sale of software are not chargeable to tax as royalty but as business income under Article 7 of the DTAA. The issue of non-allowance of TDS credit was set aside to the AO for verification and granting of credit if found in accordance with the law. Other consequential issues were dismissed. The Tribunal's decision was based on the principles laid down by the Delhi High Court in the case of DIT vs. Infrasoft Ltd and other relevant judicial precedents.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found