9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (6) TMI 513X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act') in relation to the assessment year 2014-15. Since a common issue is raised in these appeals, we are, therefore, proceeding to dispose them off by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. A.Y. 2009-10 : 2. The only issue raised on merits is against the taxability of Rs. 2,42,02,485/- as income from 'Royalty' within the meaning of section 9(1)(vi) of the Act r.w. Article 12 of the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between India and USA (hereinafter also called as 'DTAA'). Briefly, the facts of the case are that the assessee is a company registered in, and a tax resident of the United States of America. No return of income was filed for the year under consideration. The AO initiated the re-assessment proceedings by recor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s used in this Article means : (a) payments of any kind received as a consideration for the use of, or the right to use, any copyright of a literary, artistic, or scientific work, including cinematograph films or work on film, tape or other means of reproduction for use in connection with radio or television broadcasting, any patent, trademark, design or model, plan, secret formula or process, or for information concerning industrial, commercial or scientific experience, including gains derived from the alienation of any such right or property which are contingent on the productivity, use, or disposition thereof; and (b) payment of any kind received as consideration for the use of, or the right to use, the industrial, commercial, or sci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9(1)(vi) inserted vide the Finance Act 2012 is not clarificatory as it expands the scope and hence prospective. The assessment year under consideration is 2009-10. 6. Adverting to the facts of the extant case, it is seen that the disputed receipt of Rs. 2.42 crore from M/s. Honeywell Technology Solutions Lab Pvt. Ltd. is on account of sale of Software/license and not for parting with the copyright of the software. Since facts of the present case are similar to those considered and decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence Pvt. Ltd. (supra), respectfully following the precedent, we hold that the amount cannot be brought within the ambit of 'Royalties' under Article 12 of the DTAA. 7. Au ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ue espoused by the ld. AR in this appeal is about the chargeability of Rs. 86,05,13,407/-, being, income from sale of software license which was held by the AO to be an income in the nature of 'Royalty'. In fact, the ld. AR simply adopted the arguments made for the A.Y. 2009-10 without going into details for the year under consideration. The ld. DR also candidly admitted the position that the issue is similar to the earlier year. 10. In view of the rival but common submissions and following the view taken hereinabove on this issue, we hold that receipt of Software license amounting to Rs. 86,05,13,407/- cannot be charged to tax as 'Royalties' under the DTAA. In the same manner, the amount will escape taxation as 'Business profits' under Ar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
