<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2011 (12) TMI 91 - Delhi High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207919</link>
    <description>Offshore supply of hardware and embedded software by a non-resident was treated as a principal-to-principal sale completed outside India, with title and risk passing abroad; on those facts, no business connection or India-based operations generated taxable income under section 9(1)(i). The software component was held to be a copyrighted article forming part of the supplied GSM system, not a transfer of copyright rights, so it did not constitute royalty under section 9(1)(vi) or the treaty provision. Interest under section 234B was held not leviable because the non-resident had no advance-tax obligation where tax was deductible at source. The notice under section 142(1) was upheld after the validating amendment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 23 Dec 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Feb 2026 11:30:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=181392" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (12) TMI 91 - Delhi High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207919</link>
      <description>Offshore supply of hardware and embedded software by a non-resident was treated as a principal-to-principal sale completed outside India, with title and risk passing abroad; on those facts, no business connection or India-based operations generated taxable income under section 9(1)(i). The software component was held to be a copyrighted article forming part of the supplied GSM system, not a transfer of copyright rights, so it did not constitute royalty under section 9(1)(vi) or the treaty provision. Interest under section 234B was held not leviable because the non-resident had no advance-tax obligation where tax was deductible at source. The notice under section 142(1) was upheld after the validating amendment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Dec 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207919</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>