The High Court of Karnataka dismissed the writ appeal against an order holding that payments for interconnect services in telecom were not royalty. The Bench followed a coordinate bench decision and found no infirmity.
The writ appeal stands dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
NC: 2024:KHC:10968-DB WA No. 12 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA WRIT APPEAL NO. 12 OF 2024 (T-IT)
BETWEEN:
Digitally signed by A K CHANDRIKA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
(BY SRI.Y.V.RAVIRAJ ADVOCATE A/W
SRI.M.DILIP, ADVOCATES)
AND:
M/S DEUTSCHE TELEKOM AG FRIEDRICH-EBERT-ALLE 140 53113 BONN, GERMANY (REPRESENTED BY ITS HEAD OF TRANSACTION TAX, SRI ULRICH HARTMANN S/O SRI. WERNER HARTMANN AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS
…APPELLANTS
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.K.K.CHYTANYA SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI.S.SHARATH., ADVOCATE)
NC: 2024:KHC:10968-DB WA No. 12 of 2024
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WP NO.8195/2021 DATED 07/09/2023B & ETC.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, S.G.PANDIT J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGEMENT
Heard Sri. Y.V.Raviraj along with Sri. Dilip.M., learned counsel for the appellants and Sri. Chythanya.K.K., learned Senior Counsel for Sri. S.Sharath, learned counsel for the respondent.
interconnect service charges paid would amount to royalty.
“The third question is, whether the payments made to NTOS for providing interconnect services and transfer of capacity in foreign countries is chargeable to tax as royalty. It was argued by Shri.Pardiwala, that for
subsequent years in assessee’s own case, the ITAT has held that tax is not deductable when payment is made to non-resident telecom operator. This factual aspect is not refuted. Thus the Revenue has reviewed its earlier stand for the subsequent assessment years placing reliance on Viacom etc35 , rendered by the ITAT. In that view of the matter this question also needs to be answered against the Revenue.”
the above decision of the Co-ordinate Bench. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the orders under challenge.
Sd/JUDGE
Sd/JUDGE
SMJ/MPK
2 issues framed by the court
Whether interconnect service charges paid would amount to royalty.
Whether there is any infirmity in the order of the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
ITA No.160/2015 and connected appealsFollowed¶26
Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax International Taxation Circle-2(1)
M/s Deutsche Telekom AG
S.G. Pandit
C.M. Poonacha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
