2024 (4) TMI 584

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....issioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ("CIT(A)") erred both in law and on the facts of the case in not treating the amount received by the Appellant from M/s.Samsung R&D Institute India Bangalore Private Limited (Indian Payee) as royalty income (for the data services provided by the Appellant). 2. The CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that the Appellant had entered into a Production Agreement with Samsung India Electronics Private Limited ("Samsung") for providing the license to use the Indix Data Services for Samsung's new shopping application (Indix data services aggregates Samsung's shopping application) in exchange for a consideration in the nature of royalty as defined in Explanation 2 to section 9(vi) of the Act and the s....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....peal before the First Appellate Authority, and challenged denial of credit for taxes as per From No.26AS. The Ld.CIT(A) for the reasons stated in their appellate order dated 27.06.2023, directed the AO to verify Form No.26AS of the assessee and give credit for taxes amounting to Rs. 16,17,656/-. The Ld.CIT(A) further held that the sum received by the assessee from M/s.Samsung R&D Institute India Bangalore Pvt. Ltd., is taxable @20% as rightly deducted by the Indian payee, as no information was provided proving the income received to be in the nature of royalty which is taxable as per Sec. 115A(1)(b)(A) of the Act. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 4. The Ld.Counsel for the assessee, Ms.Pavitra Ma....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....provided is in the nature of transfer of right to use a computer software, including granting of license which is in the nature of royalty and thus, the assessee has rightly offered income as per Sec. 115A(1)(b)(A) of the Act. The Ld.CIT(A) without appreciating relevant facts simply taxed the sum received by the assessee as other sum and taxed @20%. 5. The Ld.DR, Shri ARV Sreenivasan, Addl.CIT, on the other hand, supporting the order of the Ld.CIT(A), submitted that the assessee could not file any evidences, including copy of agreement between the parties before the First Appellate Authority to substantiate its claim, that sum received by the assessee is in the nature of royalty referred to as per provisions of Sec. 9(1)(vi) of the Act. Th....