2015 (7) TMI 1286

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... R. ORDER Per: Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 01.04.2013 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter referred to as the CIT(A)] relevant to assessment year 2013-14. 2. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal: "1. On the facts, and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the learned Co .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tation of the uplink service provide r to the Appellant co nstitute s 'business connection' of MEASAT in India under the Act. 4. On the facts, and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the learned CIT(A) ought to have held that the transponder fees payable by the Appellant to MEASAT are not taxable in India and consequently, not subject to tax withholding under Section 195 of the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ocess" as per Explanation 6 of section 9(1)(vi). Hence the payments made for the right to use of process falls in the ambit of expression "royalty" as per DTAA as well as provisions of Income Tax Act." 5. In view of the above, respectfully following the findings of the Tribunal as noted above, we hold that the transponder fee paid by the assessee to MEASAT Malaysia was in the nature of royalty un .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X