TMI Blog2021 (5) TMI 879X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ments, is not the payment of royalty for the use of copyright in the computer software, and that the same does not give rise to any income taxable in India, as a result of which the persons referred to in Section 195 of the Income Tax Act were not liable to deduct any TDS under Section 195 - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA NO.40/2019 - - - Dated:- 17-4-2021 - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY APPELLANT (By SRI : SURYANARAYANA T, ADVOCATE) RESPONDENTS (By SRI : ARAVIND K V, ADVOCATE) JUDGMENT SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA J., The present appeal has been filed challenging the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal dated 13.6.2018 allowing the revenue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .Ltd., (reported in [2012] 345 ITR 494 [KAR]). 4. The appellant being aggrieved filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), who vide an order dated 27.9.2017 allowed the appeal and held that since the above decision of this Hon ble Court in the case of Samsung Electronics (supra) was passed on 15.10.2011 i.e., after the end of the financial year under consideration and before that the order of the Tribunal was in favour of the assessees, it was not possible for the appellant to deduct tax at source. 5. Aggrieved by the order passed by the appellate authority, the Revenue filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) and the Tribunal vide impugned order 13.6. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the issue involved in this appeal has been put to rest in view of the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal Nos.8733-8734/2018 between ENGINEERING ANALYSIS CENTRE OF EXCELLENCE PRIVATE LIMITED VS. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ANOTHER, vide order dated 02.03.2021 and the issue involved in this appeal has been answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. 4. Learned counsel for the Revenue was unable to dispute the aforesaid submission. 9. Learned counsel for the Revenue has not controverted the aforesaid submission. 10. In light of the above, for the reasons assigned in the aforesaid judgment rendered by the Supre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
