CBIC
issues clarification on applicability of the Place of Provision of Services
Rules (POPS Rules) to development of software and services on software;
Explains,“Software being intangible, does not have a unique existence and can
exist on different servers at the same point in time…Limited access to the
software for a limited period through electronic protocols is given to the
service provider by the recipient of service to enable the former to provide
the service. Only the recipient of service has control over who accesses the
software, when it can be accessed, for how long and for what purpose.”;
Applying the definition of “declared services” in Section 66E(d) of the Finance
Act and the provisions of POPS Rules, CBIC clarifies – (i) in case of services where
data, instructions etc. are provided so as to develop software i.e.
development, design and programming of IT software, the place of provision of
service is the location of service recipient, while (ii) in case of services on
software involving testing, debugging, modification etc. i.e. customisation,
adaptation, ugradation, enhancement, implementation of IT software, the place
of provision of service is the location of recipient; Therefore, in both cases,
place of provision of service is the location of service recipient : CBIC
Circular
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
GAAR Not Applicable to Genuine Capital Market Transactions: Telangana High Court
In a significant ruling, the Telangana High Court held that General Anti-Avoidance Rules (GAAR) cannot be invoked merely because a transacti...
-
Slump sale is transfer of one or more business undertakings for a lump sum consideration, without assigning individual values to the each...
-
Facts Centrica India Offshore Private Limited (CIO), an Indian Company, is a wholly owned subsidiary of Centrica Plc, UK Centrica Plc a...
-
SREI Infrastructure Finance Ltd vs. ITSC (Delhi High Court) The assessee entered into a scheme of arrangement u/s 391-394 of the Compani...
-
The Tax Audit season has started and it’s the time when the Assessees rush to their Chartered Accountants (CA) to get their Tax Audit d...
-
Facts The taxpayer, a partnership firm, derived income from the business of handling and transport of ship containers, customs clearing a...
-
M/s. Alpha Projects Society P. Ltd vs. DCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad) In AY 2005-06, the assessee made payments to contractors & for professi...
-
01. TDS u/s 194J is required to be done for Royalty also w.e.f 13-7-2006. 02. Royalty had been defined under explanation 2 of se...
-
CIT vs. Kan Construction And Colonizers (P) Ltd (Allahabad High Court) The assessee sold a plot of land for Rs. 79 lakhs. The AO held th...
-
M/s. Merilyn Shipping & Transports vs. ACIT (ITAT Visakhapatnam Special Bench) The assessee incurred brokerage expenses of Rs.38....
-
F.No.354/66/2011-TRU Government of India Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue Central Board of Excise & Customs...
No comments:
Post a Comment