CIT (IT) v. Microsoft Corporation (2022)

💻 CIT (IT) vs. Microsoft Corporation – Delhi High Court: Software Licence Payments Not Royalty under India–USA DTAA (2022)

📌 Background

The question whether software licence payments constitute “royalty” under Section 9(1)(vi) of the Income-tax Act and Article 12 of India’s DTAAs has fuelled decades of litigation. The crux of the controversy lies in whether software licensing involves:

• transfer of copyright, or
• merely use of a copyrighted article.

In most global software licence arrangements, end users obtain a non-exclusive, non-transferable licence to use the software without receiving any rights over the underlying intellectual property. Yet, the Revenue repeatedly contended that all software licence fees amounted to royalty.

The Delhi High Court’s ruling in CIT (IT) v. Microsoft Corporation (2022) reaffirmed the legal principle that unless copyright rights are transferred, payments for software cannot be taxed as royalty. This ruling was later affirmed by the Supreme Court in 2023, making it a landmark judgment.

📂 Facts of the Case

• Assessee: Microsoft Corporation, a non-resident U.S. company.
• Nature of Receipts: Licensing income from software products supplied in India.
• Arrangement:
  • Microsoft licensed its software products to Indian distributors/end users.
  • These licences permitted only use of software without transfer of source code or intellectual property.
• Revenue’s Position:
  • Software licence fees amounted to royalty under Section 9(1)(vi).
  • Payments also constituted royalty under Article 12 of the India–USA DTAA.
• Assessee’s Position:
  • No transfer of copyright took place.
  • End users received only the right to use software; they could not reproduce, modify, or commercially exploit it.
  • Thus, the receipts were business profits, taxable only if there was a Permanent Establishment (PE) in India—which there was not.
• Assessment Years: 1997-98 and 1999-2000.

The Tribunal held in favour of the assessee. The Revenue appealed to the Delhi High Court.

❓ Point of Dispute

Whether payments received by Microsoft Corporation from Indian customers/distributors for granting software licences constitute “royalty” under Section 9(1)(vi) or Article 12 of the India–USA DTAA?

📑 Submissions by the Assessee

• The licensing arrangement allowed customers to merely operate Microsoft software.
• End users could not copy, reproduce, distribute, sublicense, or alter the software.
• All IP rights remained with Microsoft.
• No copyright was transferred; therefore, the fees could not be treated as royalty.
• DTAA rates and definitions must prevail over domestic law as per Section 90(2).
• Multiple judicial precedents, especially from the Delhi High Court, supported this position.

📑 Submissions by the Revenue

• Even if customers did not receive IP rights, they used Microsoft’s “process,” making the payment royalty.
• Software was copyrighted intellectual property; therefore, any licence to use it constituted a “use of copyright.”
• The Tribunal wrongly classified payments as business income.

⚖️ Legal Principles & High Court’s Findings

1. Distinction between “copyright” and “copyrighted article”

The Court reaffirmed the well-established legal distinction:

• A copyright is the bundle of rights under the Copyright Act.
• A copyrighted article is merely a copy of the software for use.

End users of software purchase or license a copyrighted article, not copyright rights.

Thus, payments cannot be characterized as royalty.

2. DTAA overrides domestic law

Section 90(2) mandates that where the DTAA is more beneficial to the taxpayer, its provisions apply.

Article 12 of the India–USA DTAA defines royalty narrowly:

• Royalty arises only when there is use of, or right to use, copyright, patent, trademark, or similar property.

Since no copyright right was transferred, Article 12 was not triggered.

3. No transfer of copyright rights

The Court observed that:

• Microsoft retained ownership of software IP.
• Customers merely installed and used it.
• They could not replicate or commercially exploit the software.

Hence, the receipts were not royalty.

4. Consistency with earlier precedents

The Court relied heavily on its own previous decisions on similar Microsoft group entities. It noted that:

“The Tribunal was correct in holding that software licence payments were not taxable in India as royalty.”

The ruling was aligned with global judicial trends and technological realities.

5. Supreme Court affirmation

In 2023, the Supreme Court dismissed the Revenue’s SLP, effectively upholding the High Court’s conclusion. Therefore, the law stands settled.

🏁 Held

The Delhi High Court held that:

✔ Payments for software licences by Microsoft are not royalty.

✔ Article 12 of the India–USA DTAA is not attracted.

✔ No income accrues or arises in India under Section 9(1)(vi).

✔ Receipts constitute business profits, not taxable absent a PE.

✔ Revenue’s appeals dismissed.

✅ Practical Impact

• Major relief to global software suppliers offering packaged or boxed software to Indian customers.
• Reinforces the global principle that software access does not equal copyright transfer.
• Ensures that India–USA technology trade remains tax-efficient.
• Aligns Indian jurisprudence with international standards post the Supreme Court’s 2021 Engineering Analysis decision.

🔑 Key Takeaways

1. Software licence ≠ transfer of copyright.
2. Payments for copyrighted articles are not royalty.
3. DTAA protection overrides domestic tax expansions.
4. No TDS under Section 195 applies on standard software purchases.
5. Supreme Court approval cements this as a binding precedent.

📢 Why This Case Matters

The ruling resolves an issue that had troubled the Indian tech ecosystem for over two decades. By confirming that software licensing does not constitute royalty, the Courts have ensured that multinational software vendors and Indian enterprises are not burdened by unwarranted tax obligations. It harmonizes India’s tax treatment of software with global norms and encourages cross-border digital commerce.

🔍 SEO Meta Details

• Meta Title: Microsoft Corporation vs. CIT – Delhi HC: Software Licence Fees Not Royalty (2022)
• Meta Description: Delhi HC rules that Microsoft’s software licence receipts are not royalty under Section 9(1)(vi) or Article 12 of the India–USA DTAA; Supreme Court affirms.
• Keywords: Microsoft royalty case India, software licence royalty, India–USA DTAA Article 12, Section 9(1)(vi) software taxability, Microsoft Supreme Court 2023.