{"id":62133,"date":"2026-07-18T15:20:55","date_gmt":"2026-07-18T09:50:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/dialog-axiata-plc-v-dcit-2025-132-itr-43-mum-trib\/"},"modified":"2026-07-18T15:20:55","modified_gmt":"2026-07-18T09:50:55","slug":"dialog-axiata-plc-v-dcit-2025-132-itr-43-mum-trib","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/dialog-axiata-plc-v-dcit-2025-132-itr-43-mum-trib\/","title":{"rendered":"Dialog Axiata PLC v. DCIT (2025) 132 ITR 43 (Mum.)(Trib.)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p class=\"font-claude-response-body\" style=\"margin: 0in;margin-bottom: .0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height: 150%\"><span lang=\"EN-IN\" style=\"font-family: &#039;Verdana&#039;,sans-serif\">The assessee, a non-resident telecom operator in Sri Lanka, received Rs. 4,16,80,240 as interconnect usage charges from an Indian entity, VSL, which the AO, relying on Explanations 5 and 6 to section 9(1)(vi), taxed as &#8220;royalty&#8221;, a view upheld by the DRP. On appeal, the Tribunal held that the amendment inserting the Explanations to section 9(1)(vi) could not be read into the DTAA, which can be altered only through bilateral renegotiation, and the assessee was entitled to the more beneficial treaty provisions. It was further held that the interconnect usage charges did not accrue or arise in India, and in the absence of a permanent establishment in India, could not be taxed under article 7 of the Agreement. The addition was accordingly deleted.(AY. 2012-13)<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>S. 9(1)(vi) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Royalty-Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement not affected by amendments in Act-Assessee entitled to advantage of provisions under Agreement-Assessee a non-resident telecommunication operator providing international carriage and connectivity services in Sri Lanka-Interconnect user charges not royalty-Not taxable in India-DTAA-India-Sri Lanka.[S. 9(1)(vi), Explns. 2, 5, 6, 147 ,  arts. 7, 12]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_feature_clip_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-62133","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-ga9","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/62133","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=62133"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/62133\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":62134,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/62133\/revisions\/62134"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=62133"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=62133"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=62133"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}