Standardised software licence receipts were not fees for technical services, while refund adjustment required limited verification.

Standardised software licence and subscription receipts, supplied through non-exclusive and non-transferable arrangements with only incidental support, were analysed as not involving transfer of source code, proprietary rights, technical know-how or other commercially exploitable intellectual property; on that basis, the consideration was treated as not taxable as fees for technical services under the Act and the India-Ireland DTAA, and the addition was deleted. The separate refund-adjustment claim required limited factual verification before consequential relief could be granted, so that matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer for appropriate relief after verification.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether consideration received from supply of standard software licences or subscriptions with related support was taxable as fees for technical services under the Act and the India-Ireland DTAA. (ii) Whether the adjustment of refund required verification and consequential relief.

Issue (i): Whether consideration received from supply of standard software licences or subscriptions with related support was taxable as fees for technical services under the Act and the India-Ireland DTAA.

Analysis: The receipts arose from standardised software offerings distributed through non-exclusive, non-transferable arrangements, with users receiving limited rights to access and use the products. The supporting services were incidental to the main software supply and did not result in transfer of source code, proprietary rights, technical know-how, or commercially exploitable intellectual property. The reasoning was aligned with the jurisdictional High Court's treatment of standardised automated technology services, where access to a platform and incidental support did not amount to taxable technical services on the facts considered.

Conclusion: The software-related consideration was not taxable as fees for technical services, and the addition was deleted in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether the adjustment of refund required verification and consequential relief.

Analysis: The refund adjustment claim required limited factual verification of the assessee's assertion before consequential relief could be granted.

Conclusion: The issue was remanded to the Assessing Officer for limited verification and appropriate relief.

Final Conclusion: The substantive addition treating software receipts as fees for technical services was deleted, while the refund-adjustment dispute was sent back for verification, resulting in a partial allowance of the appeals.

Ratio Decidendi: Standardised software or cloud-based access arrangements, coupled only with incidental support and without transfer of proprietary rights, source code, or technical know-how, do not by themselves constitute fees for technical services.

---