9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (2) TMI 820 - AT - Income TaxIncome accrued in India - Taxability of Royalty Payment - payments received by the assessee on sale of software to India resellers/distributors is in the nature of Royalty chargeable to tax u/s 9(1)(vi) of the Act and under Article 12 of the India USA Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement DTAA - HELD THAT - A careful perusal of the agreement entered into by the assessee with the resellers in India and keeping in mind the aforementioned specific clauses, in our considered opinion, it is clear that such agreements are entered into solely for the sale of software products and not in any way entail transfer of patent, copy right or any other intellectual property right. The quarrel is squarely covered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a land mark judgment in the case of Engineering Analysis Center of Excellence Pvt Ltd. 2021 (3) TMI 138 - SUPREME COURT . Thus we are of the considered view that no right in copy right is being transferred and accordingly, consideration received by the assessee cannot be brought to tax as per India USA DTAA. - Decided in favour of assessee.
Issues Involved:
Interpretation of taxability of payments received for sale of software products under India-USA Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA). Analysis: 1. Taxability of Payments Received for Sale of Software Products: The appeal was filed against the order framing under section 144C(13) r.w.s 143(3)/254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for Assessment Year 2014-15. The main issue was whether the payments received by the assessee on the sale of software to Indian resellers/distributors constitute 'Royalty' chargeable to tax u/s 9(1)(vi) of the Act and under Article 12 of the India-USA DTAA. The Assessing Officer believed that income from the sale of software licensing to Indian distributors/resellers is taxable as 'Royalty' under Article 12 of the India-USA DTAA. The DRP upheld the additions proposed by the Assessing Officer, leading to the final assessment order. 2. Interpretation of India-USA DTAA Article 12 on Royalty Payment: Article 12 of the India-USA DTAA deals with the "Taxability of Royalty Payment." The definition of 'royalties' in the DTAA includes payments received for the use of copyright of literary, artistic, or scientific work, patent, trademark, design, or model. The agreement with Indian distributors/resellers showed that they had a non-exclusive right to sell the assessee's products and services within a specified territory, without transferring any ownership rights or intellectual property rights to them. 3. Application of Legal Precedents and Supreme Court Decision: The Tribunal analyzed the agreement between the assessee and the resellers, concluding that no transfer of copyright or intellectual property rights occurred. Citing a landmark judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, it was established that the distribution agreements did not create any interest or right amounting to the use of copyright. The Supreme Court's decision clarified that payments made for the resale/use of computer software through distribution agreements do not constitute royalty for the use of copyright, hence not taxable in India. 4. Decision and Direction to Assessing Officer: Considering the facts of the case, the Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to delete the addition made by treating the payments received for the sale of software products as 'Royalty' under the India-USA DTAA. The Tribunal highlighted that in subsequent assessment years, the Revenue had accepted the assessee's stand, further supporting the decision. Ultimately, the appeal of the assessee was allowed, and the impugned addition was directed to be deleted. This comprehensive analysis of the legal judgment highlights the interpretation of taxability under the India-USA DTAA regarding payments received for the sale of software products, emphasizing the absence of copyright transfer and the application of relevant legal precedents to support the decision in favor of the assessee.
|
