<?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>2023 (9) TMI 978 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443356</link>
    <description>Depreciation on CISCO IP Phones was remitted for fresh adjudication on the functional-use test: items functionally dependent on computers may qualify at the computer rate, while independently existing equipment may fall under plant and machinery. The Tribunal did not finally decide the rate. Payments for candidate reports to a UK service provider were held not to be royalty because the assessee received only the deliverable and had no right to use, access, modify, duplicate, or exploit the underlying software, source code, equipment, or copyright. As the sum was not chargeable to tax in India, no withholding obligation arose and the disallowance under section 40(a)(i) was deleted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 21 Sep 2023 10:49:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=726859" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (9) TMI 978 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443356</link>
      <description>Depreciation on CISCO IP Phones was remitted for fresh adjudication on the functional-use test: items functionally dependent on computers may qualify at the computer rate, while independently existing equipment may fall under plant and machinery. The Tribunal did not finally decide the rate. Payments for candidate reports to a UK service provider were held not to be royalty because the assessee received only the deliverable and had no right to use, access, modify, duplicate, or exploit the underlying software, source code, equipment, or copyright. As the sum was not chargeable to tax in India, no withholding obligation arose and the disallowance under section 40(a)(i) was deleted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443356</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>