CIT (IT) v. Salesforce. Com Singapore Pte. Ltd. (2024)

☁️ CIT (IT) vs. Salesforce.com Singapore Pte. Ltd. – Delhi High Court: CRM Software Access Fees Not Royalty under India–Singapore DTAA (2024)

📌 Background

With the rise of cloud-based applications and Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) platforms, the Indian tax authorities have frequently attempted to classify subscription fees paid by Indian customers to foreign SaaS providers as royalty or fees for technical services (FTS). Their contention has been that access to cloud platforms involves use of a “process” or “technology,” thereby triggering taxability under Section 9(1)(vi) and TDS under Section 195.

In CIT (IT) v. Salesforce.com Singapore Pte. Ltd. (2024) 465 ITR 257 (Delhi HC), the Delhi High Court addressed the taxability of payments received by Salesforce—one of the world’s leading cloud-based CRM providers—from Indian customers. The ruling provides a critical precedent for SaaS providers operating cross-border.

📂 Facts of the Case

• Assessee: Salesforce.com Singapore Pte. Ltd., a tax resident of Singapore.
• Business Activity: Subscription-based Customer Relationship Management (CRM) services delivered via the cloud.
• Assessee’s Model:
  • Customers access the CRM platform hosted on Salesforce’s servers outside India.
  • Customers input their own data and use the software’s features for analytics, workflow, and business management.
• Revenue’s Position:
  • Subscription fees constituted royalty for use of software.
  • Alternatively, payments were FTS under Section 9(1)(vii) or Article 12(4)(b) of the India–Singapore DTAA.
  • TDS under Section 195 was mandatory.
• Assessee’s Position:
  • No copyright or underlying intellectual property was transferred.
  • Customers merely accessed the platform; they did not gain possession of software or source code.
  • No technical know-how was imparted enabling customers to replicate the software.

The ITAT ruled in favour of the assessee; Revenue appealed to the High Court.

❓ Point of Dispute

Are the subscription fees earned by Salesforce for providing cloud-based CRM services taxable as “royalty” or “fees for technical services” under Section 9(1)(vi)/(vii) or Article 12 of the India–Singapore DTAA?

📑 Submissions by the Assessee

• Access to CRM software does not amount to use of copyright.
• Customers are merely users, not owners of the software or underlying IP.
• No right to modify, copy, distribute, or commercially exploit the software is granted.
• All infrastructure, servers, and proprietary systems remain under Salesforce’s exclusive control.
• Under Article 12(4)(b) of the DTAA, FTS arises only when “technical knowledge, experience, skill, know-how or processes” are made available—which is not the case.
• Customers simply use the interface; no technology is imparted.

📑 Submissions by the Revenue

• Access to the CRM platform involved use of Salesforce’s technical process.
• Customers benefit from sophisticated analytics, automation, and workflows.
• Therefore, payments should be taxed as royalty or FTS.
• Customers were utilizing Salesforce’s technology, thus bringing it within Article 12(4)(b).

⚖️ Legal Principles & High Court’s Findings

1. No transfer of copyright → No royalty (Section 9(1)(vi) & DTAA Article 12)

The Court emphasized:

• Salesforce did not transfer any copyright to customers.
• Customers never received source code, reproduction rights, or proprietary rights.
• Merely accessing software hosted on Salesforce servers does not amount to “use of copyright.”

Therefore, income cannot be taxed as royalty.

2. Application of Article 12(4)(b): “Make Available” test failed

Revenue needed to prove that Salesforce:

• provided technical knowledge or skill,
• imparted know-how or processes, enabling customers to apply the technology independently.

The Court held:

Customers merely accessed the application; they input data and used analytical tools. Nothing was made available that enabled them to replicate the software or apply technology independently.

Thus, the “make available” requirement under Article 12(4)(b) was not satisfied.

3. Access ≠ transfer of IP

The Court accepted Salesforce’s explanation (unrefuted even at the HC level):

• Customers did not acquire any IP rights.
• They were simply provided access to a cloud-hosted CRM tool.
• Control remained entirely with Salesforce.

Therefore, subscription fees could not be considered royalty.

4. Not taxable under Section 9

Since:

• no copyright was transferred,
• no right to use software was conferred, and
• no technical knowledge was made available,

the fees are not taxable in India under Section 9.

🏁 Held

The Delhi High Court held:

✔ CRM subscription fees are not royalty.

✔ Fees are not FTS under Article 12(4)(b) of the India–Singapore DTAA.

✔ No copyright or technical know-how was made available to customers.

✔ Income is not taxable in India in the absence of a PE.

✔ Revenue’s appeal dismissed.

✅ Practical Impact for SaaS and Cloud Businesses

• Cloud-based SaaS subscription fees cannot be taxed as royalty.
• No TDS is required under Section 195 for SaaS payments to non-residents.
• Reinforces the “Make Available” clause in India–Singapore DTAA.
• Provides clarity for digital service providers offering CRM, ERP, and similar applications.
• Significant relief for foreign SaaS companies and Indian enterprises utilizing cloud services.

🔑 Key Takeaways

1. SaaS access ≠ transfer of intellectual property.
2. No royalty unless copyright rights are transferred.
3. No FTS unless technology is made available for independent use.
4. DTAA protection prevails over domestic law.
5. Strengthens global tax certainty for cloud-based services.

📢 Why This Case Matters

This landmark ruling cements the legal position for cloud-based subscription models in India. As SaaS and CRM platforms become integral to modern business operations, the judgment ensures that cross-border digital services are not incorrectly categorized as royalty, eliminating unnecessary withholding tax compliance burdens and aligning India with international tax norms.

🔍 SEO Meta Details

• Meta Title: Salesforce.com Singapore vs. CIT – Delhi HC: CRM Subscription Fees Not Royalty (2024)
• Meta Description: Delhi HC rules that Salesforce’s CRM access fees are not royalty or FTS under Section 9 or Article 12(4)(b) of the India–Singapore DTAA; no tax liability in India.
• Keywords: Salesforce royalty India, SaaS taxability India, Section 9(1)(vi) royalty CRM, India–Singapore DTAA Article 12(4)(b), cloud software tax India, FTS make available clause.