https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359251 The dominant issue was whether receipts characterised as royalty/fees for included services for patents licensed to OEMs abroad and amounts under a software platform operator (BREW) agreement were taxable in India under s. 9(1)(vi)(c) of the IT Act and Art. 12 of the Indo-USA DTAA. Relying on a coordinate bench ruling in the assessee's own earlier years, the Tribunal held that royalty from licensing patents to foreign OEMs for manufacture outside India was not chargeable to tax in India under s. 9(1)(vi)(c); consequently, recourse to Art. 12(7) was unnecessary, and the assessee's grounds were allowed. Applying the same legal basis, it held the BREW agreement royalty was also not taxable under s. 9(1)(vi) or Art. 12, and deleted the additions for handset/equipment royalty and BREW invoicing revenues. en-us Mon, 16 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 19 Dec 2025 10:47:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359251 The dominant issue was whether receipts characterised as royalty/fees for included services for patents licensed to OEMs abroad and amounts under a software platform operator (BREW) agreement were taxable in India under s. 9(1)(vi)(c) of the IT Act and Art. 12 of the Indo-USA DTAA. Relying on a coordinate bench ruling in the assessee's own earlier years, the Tribunal held that royalty from licensing patents to foreign OEMs for manufacture outside India was not chargeable to tax in India under s. 9(1)(vi)(c); consequently, recourse to Art. 12(7) was unnecessary, and the assessee's grounds were allowed. Applying the same legal basis, it held the BREW agreement royalty was also not taxable under s. 9(1)(vi) or Art. 12, and deleted the additions for handset/equipment royalty and BREW invoicing revenues. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 16 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359251