Just a moment...

βœ•
Top
Help
πŸš€ New: Section-Wise Filter βœ•

1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β€” now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available

2. New: β€œIn Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.

Try both these filters in Case Laws β†’

×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedbackβœ•

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 βœ•
  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
β•³
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
βœ•
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close βœ•
🔎 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
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
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
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 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
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    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

        Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

        Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.

        <h1>Tribunal rules in favor of US company in tax dispute on technical services & software license fees</h1> The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, a US-based company, in a tax dispute regarding the chargeability of fees for technical services and software ... Chargeability as 'Fees for technical services’ - test of β€˜make available’ - HELD THAT:- The technical knowledge, experience, skill etc. should not get exhausted in the service itself. Something should be provided in such a manner that the receiver may use it after its receipt. If certain technical or consultancy services etc. are provided by one, which get exhausted in the process of providing such services, they do not β€˜make available’ any technical knowledge, experience, skill etc., to the other. Extantly, we are confronted with a situation in which the assessee provided technical or consultancy services through its two employees which were consumed in the provision of services itself and nothing was β€˜made available’ to TTL or TML for afterwards use. The PVR clearly refers to certain deliverables by TTL to TTM, such as, Vehicle Configuration (VC) with all necessary components required to construct the full VC for the X101Aa (Vista FL LHD and FL LHD NCAP 3 star) VTS and Manufacturing Feasibility Considerations, which refer to making available the requisite design or engineering to TML. Unlike TTL, there is no reference to any deliverables in the PVR by the assessee either to TTL or TML, which further fortifies that services rendered by the assessee are albeit in realm of technical services but are not made available to anyone. Whereas the provision of Engineering and Design services by TTL to TML satisfy the test of β€˜make available’, the provision of services by the assessee to TTL fall short of the same and hence they do not fall within the definition of `Fees for included services’ under Article 12(4) of the DTAA. Going with the mandate of section 90(2) of the Act, it is the definition of `Fees for Included services’ under the DTAA which would prevail over the definition of `Fees for technical services’ u/s.9(1)(vii) of the Act. Since the assessee did not receive any Fees for Included services under Article 12(4) of the DTAA to TTL, the sum of β‚Ή 52.73 lakh, can’t be charged to tax as Fees for Technical services. We have observed above that the assessee categorically stated before the AO that it did not have any Permanent Establishment in India, which point has not been controverted by the Officer. In the absence of the assessee having any PE in India as per Article 5 of the DTAA, the amount received from TTL cannot be considered as Business profits in terms of Article 7. We, therefore, hold that the amount of β‚Ή 52.73 lakh is not chargeable to tax. This ground is allowed. Taxability of Software License fees - After analyzing the identical issue in the backdrop of similar expression as used in Article 12(3), it has been held that ownership of copyright in a work is different from the ownership of the physical material in which the copyrighted work may happen to be embodied. Parting with copyright entails parting with the right to do any of the acts mentioned in section 14 of the Copyright Act. Where the core of a transaction is to authorize the end-user to have access to and make use of the β€œlicensed” computer software product over which the licensee has no exclusive rights, no copyright is parted with. Adverting to the facts of the extant case, it is seen that the disputed receipt of β‚Ή 65.28 lakh from TTL is on account of sale of Software license and not for parting with the copyright of the software. Since facts of the present case are similar to those considered and decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence Pvt. Ltd. [2021 (3) TMI 138 - SUPREME COURT], respectfully following the precedent, we hold that the amount cannot be brought within the ambit of β€˜Royalties’ under Article 12 of the DTAA. Ergo, its taxability is not magnetized. This ground is accepted. Issues Involved:1. Chargeability of Rs. 52,73,977 as 'Fees for Technical Services'.2. Taxability of Software License Fees amounting to Rs. 65,28,405.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Chargeability of Rs. 52,73,977 as 'Fees for Technical Services':The assessee, a US-based company, filed a return of income declaring Nil income, claiming no Permanent Establishment (PE) in India. The Assessing Officer (AO) noted that the assessee received Rs. 1,69,29,769 for 'Provision of Design and Engineering services'. Out of this, Rs. 52,73,977 received from Tata Technologies Limited (TTL) for services to Tata Motors Limited (TML) was construed as fees for technical services. The assessee contended that it did not 'make available' any technical knowledge, experience, or skill, thus falling outside the ambit of taxation under Article 12(4) of the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) between India and USA. The AO and the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) disagreed, treating the amount as 'fees for technical services/fees for included services' and included it in the total income.The Tribunal analyzed the nature of the transaction, noting that TTL was engaged by TML for engineering services related to vehicle development. The Project Variation Request (PVR) indicated that the assessee provided manpower support (one Project Engineer and one Design Lead) for the project. The Tribunal found that the services provided by the assessee were predominantly supervisory, ensuring timely delivery and issue resolution, and did not 'make available' any technical knowledge or skill for future use by TTL or TML. Thus, the services did not fall under 'Fees for Included Services' as per Article 12(4) of the DTAA. Since the assessee had no PE in India, the amount could not be considered as Business profits under Article 7. Consequently, the Rs. 52,73,977 was not chargeable to tax.2. Taxability of Software License Fees amounting to Rs. 65,28,405:The AO observed that the assessee, a distributor of software licenses, acquired software packages from third parties and sold them to TTL, which in turn sold them to Indian customers. The AO treated the sale of software licenses as Royalty under the Act and the DTAA, relying on various judicial decisions. The DRP upheld this view.The Tribunal referred to Article 12 of the DTAA, which defines 'Royalties' as payments for the use or right to use any copyright. The Tribunal cited the Supreme Court's decision in Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT, which distinguished between ownership of copyright and ownership of the physical material embodying the copyrighted work. The Supreme Court held that transactions allowing end-users to access and use software without exclusive rights do not constitute parting with copyright.Applying this precedent, the Tribunal found that the Rs. 65,28,405 received by the assessee was for the sale of software licenses, not for parting with copyright. Therefore, the amount did not qualify as 'Royalties' under Article 12 of the DTAA and was not taxable.Conclusion:The appeal was allowed, with the Tribunal ruling that neither the Rs. 52,73,977 for technical services nor the Rs. 65,28,405 for software license fees were chargeable to tax. The order was pronounced in the Open Court on 21st December 2021.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found