<?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>2016 (9) TMI 1566 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287183</link>
    <description>Receipts from sale or licensing of off-the-shelf software were examined for royalty treatment under domestic law and the India-US treaty. The Tribunal noted the distinction between transfer of copyright rights and transfer of a copyrighted article, and that a non-exclusive, non-transferable licence for internal business use is not royalty under the Delhi High Court approach in Infrasoft. It also recorded that a unilateral retrospective amendment to the Income-tax Act does not by itself expand the treaty definition of royalty unless the treaty is correspondingly amended by both contracting states. The matter was therefore remitted for fresh examination in light of the governing law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 26 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2020 10:52:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=609081" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (9) TMI 1566 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287183</link>
      <description>Receipts from sale or licensing of off-the-shelf software were examined for royalty treatment under domestic law and the India-US treaty. The Tribunal noted the distinction between transfer of copyright rights and transfer of a copyrighted article, and that a non-exclusive, non-transferable licence for internal business use is not royalty under the Delhi High Court approach in Infrasoft. It also recorded that a unilateral retrospective amendment to the Income-tax Act does not by itself expand the treaty definition of royalty unless the treaty is correspondingly amended by both contracting states. The matter was therefore remitted for fresh examination in light of the governing law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 26 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287183</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>