This Digest of case laws is prepared by KSA Legal and AIFTP from judgements reported in BCAJ, CTR, DTR, ITD, ITR, ITR (Trib), Chamber's Journal, SOT, Taxman, TTJ, BCAJ, ACAJ, www.itatonline.org and other journals
Click here to download the pdf versions of the Digest of case laws

S. 9(1)(vii) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Fees for technical services-Royalty-Intra-group services agreement with its India affiliates, services provided in relation to marketing and sales services-Services did not ‘make available’ technical knowledge, experience, skill, know-how or processes and there was no transfer of technology-DTAA-India-Singapore [S.9(1)(vi) , art. 12(4)]

DCIT v. CEVA Asia Pacific Holdings Company Pte. Ltd. (2023) 203 ITD 438 / (2024) 109 ITR 280 / 227 TTJ 50 (Delhi) (Trib.)

S. 9(1)(vii) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Fees for technical services-No make available clause-IT services to Indian customers-Taxable in India-Fee for providing corporate guarantee to its Indian AE-DTAA-India-Finland.[S. 56, art. 5, 7 , 12 , 21]

Metso Outotec OYJ, (Earlier Known as “Outotec Oyj”) v. Dy. CIT (2023) 203 ITD 79 /(2024) 227 TTJ 715 (Kol)(Trib.)

S. 9(1)(vii) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Fees for technical services-Payment of destination sampling charges to non-resident service providers for services rendered by them outside India-Payment is not taxable-DTAA-India-China [art. 12]

Tumkur Minerals (P.) Ltd. v. JCIT (2023) 203 ITD 491 (Panaji) (Trib.)

S. 9(1)(vi) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Royalty-Roaming services to its customers while travelling to UK-roaming charges paid to assessee would not fall within scope and meaning of royalty-DTAA-India-UK [Art. 13]

Telefonica UK Ltd. v. DCIT (2023) 203 ITD 171 (Mum) (Trib.)

S. 9(1)(vi) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Royalty-Business of providing human resource background screening services including pre-employment background screening, employment, education, verification services and investigative due diligence services etc-Consideration cannot be treated as royalty-DTAA-India-UK.[S.9(1)(vii), art. 13 (4), Indian Copyright Act, 1957 , S. 13(1)(a)]

Hire Right Ltd. v. ACIT IT (2023) 203 ITD 508 (Delhi) (Trib.)

S. 9(1)(i) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Business connection-Non-resident trust-Investment in Indian Portfolio companies-Beneficial provisions of India-UAE DTAA-Not Chargeable to tax in India either by virtue of application of section 61 read with section 63 or on an application of section 161 conjointly with provisions of article 24 of India-UAE DTAA.[S.5, 61, 63 , 115AD , 161 , art. 24]

Green Maiden A 2013 Trust. v. ACIT (IF) (2023) 203 ITD 599 (Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 9(1)(i) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Business connection-Capital gains-Sale of shares-Produced relevant documents to prove that entire affairs were controlled from Singapore, short-term capital gains were exempt from tax-DTAA-India-Singapore. [art. 13]

Golden State Capital Pte. Ltd. v. DCIT (IT) (2023) 203 ITD 303 / 2024) 229 TTJ 290 (Delhi) (Trib.)

S. 9(1)(i) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Business connection-Supervision-Frequent visit by employees-Fixed PE, place of business-Profit attribution had to be made in hands of assessee due to such fixed place Permanent Establishment-Subsidiary-No authority to conclude contracts or secure orders-Not a Dependent Agent PE of assessee in India-No transfer of right to use, either to assessee or its subsidiary (CIS) and no part of equipment was leased out to CIS, said payment did not constitute royalty under provisions of article 12 of India-USA DTAA-Reimbursement of expenses-Not taxable-DTAA-India-USA.[S. 9(1)(vi) , Art. 5 ,7, 12]

Concentrix CVG Customer Management Group Inc. v. ACIT (IT) (2023) 203 ITD 110 (Delhi) (Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Income from other sources-Fixed deposit-Deemed Municipality working in name and style as ‘Sachin Notified Area’-Issue of interest on fixed deposit which was assessable under head ‘income from other sources’, had been examined by Assessing Officer during assessment stage by conducting necessary enquiry, order of AO sought to be revised in impugned order was neither erroneous nor prejudicial to interest of revenue for reason of any lack of inquiry-Delay of 208 days for filing appeal is condoned. [S.10(20), 56 253]

Sachin Notified Area. v. PCIT (2023) 202 ITD 573 (Surat) (Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-subscription fee for providing access to database pertaining to legal and law related information-Business profits-No permanent establishment-Not taxable in India-Revision is not valid-DTAA-India-USA [S. 9(1)(i), 9(1)(vii), art.7]

Relx Inc. v. ITO (2023) 202 ITD 213 (Delhi) (Trib.)