Skip to main content
Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law
Document Fragment View
Matching Fragments
"7. We have considered the submissions of both the parties
and carefully gone through the material available on record. In
the present case, it is not in dispute that in assessee's own case,
identical issue has been decided by the Hon'ble jurisdictional
High Court and Their Lordships in the judgment dated
15.10.2011 while deciding the ITA No.2808/2005 & Ors.,
observed in paras 20 to 25 as under:
"20. Having regard to the above said definition of
'royalty', we have to consider the contents of software
licence agreement entered into by non-resident with
Samsung Electronics and also respondents in the case
represented by Sri Ganesh, learned senior counsel and
Sri Aravind Dattar, wherein it is a case of purchase, sale
or distribution or otherwise of the off-the-shelf software.
It is described as a 'software licence agreement', wherein
it is averred that customer accepts an individual, non-
transferable and non-exclusive licence to use the
licensed software program(s) progam(s) on the terms
and conditions enumerated in the agreement. It is further
averred that the customer - Samsung Electronics shall
protect confidential information and shall not remove
any copyright, confidentiality or other proprietary rights
provided by the non-resident. However, what is granted
under the said licence is only a licence to use the
software for internal business without having any right
ITA Nos. 634 to 637Bang/2011
for making any alteration or reverse engineering or
creating sub-licences. What is transferred under the said
licence is the licence to use the software and copyright
continue to be with the non-resident as per the
agreement. Even as per the agreement entered into with
the other distributors as also the end-user licence
agreement, it is clear that the distributor would get
exclusive non-transferable licence within the territory
for which he is appointed and he has got right to
distribute via resellers the Software, upon payment of
the licenses set forth in Exhibit A to the agreement only
to End Users pursuant to a valid Actuate shrinkwrap or
other Actuate license agreement and except as expressly
set forth in the said agreement, distributor may not rent,
lease, loan, sell or otherwise distribute the Software the
Documentation or any derivative works based upon the
Software or Documentation in whole or in part.
Distributor shall not reverse engineer, decompile, or
otherwise attempt to derive or modify the source code
for the Software. Distributor shall have no rights to the
Software other than the rights expressly set forth in the
agreement. Distributor shall not modify or copy any part
of the Software or Documentation. Distributor may not
use sub-distributors for further distribution of the
Software and Documentation without the prior consent
of Actuate. What is charged is the licence fee to be paid
by the Distributor of the Software as enumerated in
Exhibit A to the agreement. Further, Clause 6.01 of the
agreement dealing with title states that the Distributor
acknowledges that Actuate and its suppliers retain all
right, title and interest in and to the original, and any
copies (by whomever produced), of the Software or
Documentation and ownership of all patent copyright,
trademark, trade secret and other intellectual property
rights pertaining thereto, shall be and remain the sole
property of Actuate. Distributor shall not be an owner of
any copies of, or any interest in, the Software, but rather
is licenced pursuant to the Agreement to use and
distribute such copies. Actuate represents that it has the
right to enter into the Agreement and grant the licences
provided therein and confidentiality is protected.
Therefore, on reading the contents of the respective
agreement entered into by the respondents with the non-
resident, it is clear that under the agreement, what is
transferred is only a licence to use the copyright
belonging to the non-resident subject to the terms and
ITA Nos. 634 to 637Bang/2011
conditions of the agreement as referred to above and the
non-resident supplier continues to be the owner of the
copyright and all other intellectual property rights. It is
well settled that copyright is a negative right. It is an
umbrella of many rights and licence is granted for
making use of the copyright in respect of shrink
wrapped software/off-the-shelf software under the
respective agreement, which authorizes the end user i.e.,
the customer to make use of the copyright software
contained in the said software, which is purchased off
the shelf or imported as shrink wrapped software and the
same would amount to transfer of part of the copyright
and transfer of right to use the copyright for internal
business as per the terms and conditions of the
agreement. Therefore, the contention of the learned
senior counsel appearing for the respondents that there is
no transfer of copyright or any part thereof under the
agreements entered into by the respondent with the non-
resident supplier of software cannot be accepted.