https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393825 The Court set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to the Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) to reassess the nature of the income and its taxability. The CIT was directed to determine whether the income falls under the definition of royalty under Explanation 2 to Section 9(1)(vi). If categorized as royalty, it would be taxable under Section 44DA; otherwise, it would be taxable under Section 44BB. The Court granted the Petitioner the liberty to claim benefits under the India-Australia Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA). en-us Fri, 13 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 02 Mar 2026 10:30:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393825 The Court set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to the Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) to reassess the nature of the income and its taxability. The CIT was directed to determine whether the income falls under the definition of royalty under Explanation 2 to Section 9(1)(vi). If categorized as royalty, it would be taxable under Section 44DA; otherwise, it would be taxable under Section 44BB. The Court granted the Petitioner the liberty to claim benefits under the India-Australia Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA). Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 13 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393825