https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252078 Additional evidence was admitted under Rule 29 because it was relevant to the central controversy, had earlier been sought from the assessee, and would cause no prejudice. Copyright was held to subsist in the assessee's news stories and photographs because copyright protects original expression, selection, arrangement and presentation, not mere facts or current events; the contractual restrictions, licence terms and copyright credit showed controlled use of proprietary material, so consideration under the distribution agreements was taxable as royalty under section 9(1)(vi) and the applicable DTAA. Interest under section 234B was upheld on the facts applied by the Tribunal. en-us Mon, 15 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Oct 2014 19:13:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252078 Additional evidence was admitted under Rule 29 because it was relevant to the central controversy, had earlier been sought from the assessee, and would cause no prejudice. Copyright was held to subsist in the assessee's news stories and photographs because copyright protects original expression, selection, arrangement and presentation, not mere facts or current events; the contractual restrictions, licence terms and copyright credit showed controlled use of proprietary material, so consideration under the distribution agreements was taxable as royalty under section 9(1)(vi) and the applicable DTAA. Interest under section 234B was upheld on the facts applied by the Tribunal. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 15 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252078