<?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>Prospective royalty amendment ruling: IPLC bandwidth payments were not taxable, so no TDS disallowance could stand.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=99453</link>
    <description>Explanations 4 to 6 to section 9(1)(vi) were held to expand the definition of royalty and to operate prospectively from 01.04.2012, following the Supreme Court ruling in Engineering Analysis and the assessee&#039;s earlier case. On that basis, remittance for IPLC and related bandwidth services to a non-resident was not taxable as royalty for the years in question, so no obligation to deduct tax at source under section 195 arose. Consequently, disallowance under section 40(a)(i) and consequential action under section 201, including interest liability, could not be sustained. The Court also noted that the law does not require an impossible act, and the questions of law were answered for the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 04 May 2026 08:42:21 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 May 2026 08:42:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=899771" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Prospective royalty amendment ruling: IPLC bandwidth payments were not taxable, so no TDS disallowance could stand.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=99453</link>
      <description>Explanations 4 to 6 to section 9(1)(vi) were held to expand the definition of royalty and to operate prospectively from 01.04.2012, following the Supreme Court ruling in Engineering Analysis and the assessee&#039;s earlier case. On that basis, remittance for IPLC and related bandwidth services to a non-resident was not taxable as royalty for the years in question, so no obligation to deduct tax at source under section 195 arose. Consequently, disallowance under section 40(a)(i) and consequential action under section 201, including interest liability, could not be sustained. The Court also noted that the law does not require an impossible act, and the questions of law were answered for the assessee.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 May 2026 08:42:21 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=99453</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>