<?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>2014 (5) TMI 77 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=247150</link>
    <description>Payment for procurement and resale of software licences was examined on the question whether it constituted royalty, attracting tax deduction at source and disallowance under section 40(a)(i). The assessee contended that it acted only as a distributor, with no access to source code or rights to modify, reproduce or commercially exploit the software, and relied on the principle that a mere dealer&#039;s purchase and resale does not automatically amount to royalty. However, the factual basis for that claim required supporting material, and the matter had been decided below largely by reference to earlier orders that were themselves remitted. The issue was therefore restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication after hearing the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 06 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 May 2014 13:44:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=354633" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (5) TMI 77 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=247150</link>
      <description>Payment for procurement and resale of software licences was examined on the question whether it constituted royalty, attracting tax deduction at source and disallowance under section 40(a)(i). The assessee contended that it acted only as a distributor, with no access to source code or rights to modify, reproduce or commercially exploit the software, and relied on the principle that a mere dealer&#039;s purchase and resale does not automatically amount to royalty. However, the factual basis for that claim required supporting material, and the matter had been decided below largely by reference to earlier orders that were themselves remitted. The issue was therefore restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication after hearing the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=247150</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>