Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

(b). selling or providing the computer program on commercial rental. Accordingly, the A.O was of the view that a mere grant of any right in a copyright as mentioned in Sec. 14 of the Copyright Act would suffice to fulfil the condition of clause (v) of Explanation 2 to Sec. 9(1)(vi) of the Act. It was observed by the A.O, that the acts of the assessee and the distribution under the „agreements‟ to the end user customers through its distributors indicated the transfer or use of some of the copyrights as mentioned in Sec. 14 of the Copyright Act by the assessee to the distributors. Also, relying upon the Explanation 4 and 5 to Sec. 9(1)(vi), as had been made available on the statute vide the Finance Act, 2012 w.r.e.f 01.06.1976, the A.O was of the view that after the amendment it could safely be concluded that transfer of all or any rights to use a computer software (including the grant of a license) fell within the ambit of the term „royalty‟ under Sec. 9(1)(vi) of the Act. Further, the A.O was of the view that the definition of „royalty‟ under Article 12(3) of the India-Finland tax treaty was similar to the definition of „royalty‟ under the provisions of the Act, and the insertion of Explanations 3, 4, 5 and 6 to the definition of „royalty‟ under the Act had not expanded the scope of „royalty‟ under the India-Finland tax Trimble Solutions Corporation Vs. Dy. CIT ITA No 7410/Mum/2017 - A.Y 2013-14 6 treaty. Further, the A.O observed that the doctrine of updating construction was required to be applied to the tax treaty and to the terms appearing in the tax treaty which not having been expressly defined in the treaty were to be understood with the changing environment.