<?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>2018 (12) TMI 112 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371343</link>
    <description>Receipts from supply or distribution of software were held not to constitute royalty under section 9(1)(vi) or Article 12 of the India-Ireland treaty because the arrangement involved only a transfer of a copyrighted article, not any copyright or rights in copyright. The tribunal followed binding jurisdictional rulings that distinguish between a copyrighted product and the underlying copyright, and held that mere use, sale, or distribution of software without conferral of copyright rights does not amount to royalty. As the treaty provisions were more beneficial, no separate characterization under the Act was required. The receipts were therefore not taxable as royalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:13:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=545140" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (12) TMI 112 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371343</link>
      <description>Receipts from supply or distribution of software were held not to constitute royalty under section 9(1)(vi) or Article 12 of the India-Ireland treaty because the arrangement involved only a transfer of a copyrighted article, not any copyright or rights in copyright. The tribunal followed binding jurisdictional rulings that distinguish between a copyrighted product and the underlying copyright, and held that mere use, sale, or distribution of software without conferral of copyright rights does not amount to royalty. As the treaty provisions were more beneficial, no separate characterization under the Act was required. The receipts were therefore not taxable as royalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371343</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>