TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (1) TMI 1047
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....this Court in the case of CIT (International Taxation) v. Fox Network Group Singapore Pte. Ltd. reported in [2024] 158 taxmann.com 434 (Delhi), in which the earlier judgment of this Court rendered in the case of CIT v. Delhi Race Club (1940) Ltd. reported in (2014) 51 taxmann.com 550 (Delhi) involving an identical fact-situation has been dealt with and followed. 2. It will not be out of place to reproduce the relevant part of the judgment in the case of Fox Network (supra): "7. Before us, both Mr. Bhatia as well as Mr. Rai have assailed the view taken by the ITAT contending that the service from which income was generated would clearly fall within the ambit of Explanation 2 as placed in Section 9(1)(vi) of the Act. 8. W....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ights as those akin to 'copyright' clearly brought out the distinction between two rights in Copyright Act, 1957. According to the Court, it was a clear manifestation of legislative intent to treat copyright and broadcasting reproduction rights as distinct and separate rights. It also held that the amendment of the Act in 1994 not only extended such rights to all broadcasting organizations but also clearly crystallized the nature of such rights. The Court did not accept the contention of the respondent that the two rights are not mutually exclusive by holding that the two rights though akin are nevertheless separate and distinct. 17. In view of the aforesaid position of law which brought out a distinction between a copyright and br....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the simple reason the cl. (v) of explanation 2 to clause (vi) of sub-section(1) of Section 9 would relate to work which includes films or video tapes for use in connection with television or tapes for use in connection with radio broadcasting. It is to be seen whether consideration for transfer of all or any rights of 'scientific work' including films or video tapes would include a live telecast. The clause is an inclusive provision for films or video tapes for use in connection with television or tapes for use in connection with radio broadcasting. We note such a case was not set up by the appellant-Revenue before the authorities below. It was held by the AO that when any person pays any amount for getting rights/licence to telecast any e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... nor in this appeal. In fact it is not known nor pleaded that the live telecast, in this case, was accompanied by commentary, analysis etc. It is an issue of fact, which cannot be gone into or raised at this stage. In view of our discussion above, we are of the view that no question of law arises in the present appeals. We dismiss the appeals filed by the appellant-Revenue." 10. In light of the unequivocal conclusions as expressed by the Division Bench in Delhi Race Club and with which we concur, we find that once the Court came to the conclusion that a live telecast would not fall within the ambit of the expression 'work', it would be wholly erroneous to hold that the income derived by the assessee in respect of 'live feed' would ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....letely justified in arriving at the finding that the fees received by the respondents towards live transmission could not be classified as royalty income under Section 9(1)(vi) of the Act. Consequently, no substantial question of law arises in the instant appeals and the appeals stand dismissed on the aforesaid terms." 3. Mr. Ajay Vohra, learned counsel for the respondent further submitted that the SLP filed against another judgment, wherein identical issue was involved has been withdrawn by the department from Hon'ble the Supreme Court on 13.01.2026 in SLP no. 028186/2016. 4. We have perused the judgment of CIT v. Fox Network Group Singapore Pte. Ltd. and also considered the fact that even the SLP involving identical question filed b....