TMI Blog2010 (12) TMI 254X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... UDICIAL MEMBER J, P.M. JAGTAP ACCOUNTANT MEMBER J, Appellant by Shri R.S. Srivastava Respondent by Shri Nitesh Joshi ORDER Per P.M. Jagtap, Accountant Member : These two appeals preferred by the Revenue against two separate orders passed by the ld. CIT(A) - XXXI, Mumbai dated 28.2.2008 29.2.2008 involve a common issue and the same therefore have been heard together and are being disposed of by this composite order. 2. The solitary common issue which is involved in these appeals is whether the payment made by the assessee to M/s Avaya International Sales Ltd., Ireland in respect of activation charges is in the nature of "Royalty" or "Fees for Technical Services" and the same is raised in the form of following ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eir specific requirements. According to the assessee, all these features provided in the software were an integral part of the hardware being embedded therein and inextricably linked thereto. This stand of the assessee was supported by a single purchase order placed by the customers for the hardware as well as desired features required by them. Subsequent activation charges for additional features required by the customers, however, were being charged by the assessee separately. According to the assessee, the payment made by it to M/s Avaya International Sales Ltd., Ireland against purchases of converged communication solution did not attract deduction of tax at source and accordingly applications u/s 195(2) were filed by the assessee befor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. Aggrieved by this relief given by the ld. CIT(A) to the assessee, the Revenue has preferred these appeals before the Tribunal. 5. At the time of hearing before us, the learned representatives of both the sides have agreed that a similar issue involved in assessee's own case has already been decided by the co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in favour of the assessee vide its order dated 20th August, 2010 passed in ITA Nos. 1462 1463/Mum/09. A copy of the said order is also placed on record before us and a perusal of the same shows that a similar issue has already been considered and examined by the Tribunal in assessee's own case and after discussing the facts of assessee's case in the light of definition of the term "Fees for Tec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
