| COURT: | Delhi High Court |
| CORAM: | Sanjeev Narula J, vipin Sanghi J |
| SECTION(S): | 44BB, 44DA |
| GENRE: | Domestic Tax, International Tax |
| CATCH WORDS: | Fees for technical services, royalty |
| COUNSEL: | Piyush Kaushik |
| DATE: | March 13, 2020 (Date of pronouncement) |
| DATE: | March 25, 2020 (Date of publication) |
| AY: | 2012-13 |
| FILE: | Click here to view full post with file download link |
| CITATION: | |
| S. 44DA prevails over s. 44BB after the amendment w.e.f. 01.04.2011. Income from provision of services through high end customized software does not constitute "Fees For Technical Services" u/s 9(1)(vii) as the definition excludes income from "mining or like project". The Q whether income from composite software and maintenance services constitutes "royalty" for purposes of s. 44DA would have to be decided from the nature of services. The assessee is eligible to take benefit of the definition of 'royalty' as per the DTAA for the purpose of applicability of s. 44DA | |
If the nature of services rendered have a proximate nexus with the extraction of production of mineral oils, it would be outside the ambit of the definition of FTS. In the instant case, since the nature of services rendered by the Petitioner gets excluded from the definition of “FTS”, in light of what is discussed above, the next logical question that arises for consideration is whether the Petitioner can claim the benefit of Section 44BB. The answer to this question is contingent on factual determination, as the legal position has changed from April 01, 2011. It is now required to be considered whether the receipts in the hands of the assessee qualify to be “royalty” or not? If the answer to this question is in the affirmative, then in that event, the relevant provision would now be 44DA(1).
Recent Comments