Delhi High Court
Commissioner Of Income Tax ... vs M/S. Nagravision S.A. on 21 September, 2022
$~45
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ ITA 348/2022
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL
TAXATION)-2 ..... Appellant
Through: Ms.Easha Kadian, Advocate for
Mr.Sanjay Kumar, Sr.Standing
Counsel for the Revenue.
versus
M/S. NAGRAVISION S.A. ..... Respondent
Through: Ms.Ananya Kapoor with Mr.Vibhu
Jain, Advocates.
% Date of Decision: 21st September, 2022
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
JUDGMENT
MANMOHAN, J (Oral):
1. Present income tax appeal has been filed challenging the order dated
31st January, 2022 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ('ITAT') in
ITA No. 140/Del./2021 for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The relevant
portion of the impugned order is reproduced hereinbelow:-
"4.2 It was also claimed by the Appellant that issues raised in
grounds no 3 and 4, are squarely covered by the order of the
Hon'ble Tribunal in Appellant's own case i.e. ITA
No.9130/Del/2019 AY 2016-17 decided on 06-07-2020 and
recent Judgement of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Engineering
Analysis Centre for Excellence Private Limited Vs Commissioner
of Income Tax & Another - AIR 2021 SC 124/432 ITR 471(SC).
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:JASWANT
SINGH RAWAT
Signing Date:22.09.2022
18:44:56
4.3 The Ld. DR did not refute the claim of the Appellant.
4.4 We have given thoughtful consideration to the submissions of
the Appellant and perused the order and judgment as referred
above by the Appellant and observed that the issues under
consideration as raised vide grounds no. 3 and 4 in this appeal,
are identically the same, as have been decided by the Hon'ble
Tribunal in Appellant's own case i.e. ITA No.9130/Del/2019 for
the previous AY 2016-17 decided on 06-07-2020 and even
covered by the recent judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
the case of Engineering Analysis Centre for Excellence Private
Limited vs. Commissioner of Income Tax & Another (Supra)."
2. Learned counsel for the Appellant states that the ITAT has erred in
holding that the income from supply of CAS and middleware products to
indian customers, does not fall under the 'royalty' as defined under Section
9(l)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') and Article 12(3) of the
India- Swiss DTAA.
3. Admittedly, the questions of law urged in the present appeal are
covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Engineering
Analysis Centre of Excellence Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 432 ITR 471 SC.
4. At this stage, learned Counsel for the Appellant states that the revenue
has not accepted the decision in Engineering Analysis (supra) and has
preferred a review petition against the same.
5. Though the review petition in Engineering Analysis (supra) is
pending before the Supreme Court, yet there is no stay of the said judgment
till date.
6. Consequently, in view of the judgments of the Supreme Court
in Kunhayammed and Others Vs. State of Kerala And Another, (2000) 6
SCC 359 and Shree Chamundi Mopeds Ltd. Vs. Church of South India
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:JASWANT
SINGH RAWAT
Signing Date:22.09.2022
18:44:56
Trust Association CSI Cinod Secretariat, Madras (1992) 3 SCC 1, the
present appeal is covered by the judgment of the Supreme Court in
Engineering Analysis (supra).
7. Accordingly, no substantial question of law arises for consideration in
the present appeal and the same is dismissed.
MANMOHAN, J
MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J
SEPTEMBER 21, 2022
KA
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:JASWANT
SINGH RAWAT
Signing Date:22.09.2022
18:44:56
