<?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>2017 (4) TMI 763 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341793</link>
    <description>Payments for restricted access to software and network facilities under the master service arrangement were not royalty under Article 12(4) of the India-Netherlands DTAA or section 9(1)(vi) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, because the service provider received only a limited, non-transferable right to use a copyrighted article for its own business use, not any right in the copyright itself. The agreement barred transfer, copying, decompiling, reverse engineering and sublicensing, and no source code or proprietary process rights were made available. Retrospective amendments to section 9(1)(vi) did not alter the treaty position. The payments were therefore not taxable in India as royalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 15 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 May 2017 17:52:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=466145" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (4) TMI 763 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341793</link>
      <description>Payments for restricted access to software and network facilities under the master service arrangement were not royalty under Article 12(4) of the India-Netherlands DTAA or section 9(1)(vi) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, because the service provider received only a limited, non-transferable right to use a copyrighted article for its own business use, not any right in the copyright itself. The agreement barred transfer, copying, decompiling, reverse engineering and sublicensing, and no source code or proprietary process rights were made available. Retrospective amendments to section 9(1)(vi) did not alter the treaty position. The payments were therefore not taxable in India as royalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 15 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341793</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>