$~78 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : 10.02.2026 + W.P.(C) 17641/2025 & CM APPL. 72869/2025 FINANCIAL AND RISK ORGANISATION LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. with Dr.

Shashwat Bajpai, Adv.

versus THE INCOME TAX OFFICER CIRCLE INT. TAX 1(3)(1) NEW DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Debesh Panda, SSC and Ms.

Anauntta Shankar, Adv.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR

JUDGMENT

DINESH MEHTA, J. (ORAL)

1. By way of the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has called in question the order dated 23.06.2025 (passed on 21.08.2025) passed by Circle INT TAX 1(3)(1) (hereinafter referred to as ‘the competent authority’) and consequential certificate dated 21.08.2025 issued under Section 197 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act of 1961’) whereby the tax withholding certificate (hereinafter referred to as ‘the certificate’) at the rate of 15% has been issued, as against petitioner’s request for issuance of ‘NIL’

rate certificate.

2. As per the pleadings of the petitioner, it is a company incorporated in the United Kingdom and is a tax resident thereof for Assessment Year (AY) 2026–27, having furnished a valid Tax Residency Certificate. The petitioner is engaged in providing subscription-based information and software products, which grant access to publicly available financial, economic, commercial and regulatory data, including market data, reports, news and other financial information. It also provides FXall products, being an electronic platform facilitating real-time online trading in foreign exchange instruments such as spots, forwards, swaps and options.

3. The petitioner claims to have entered into a non-exclusive distribution agreement with Refinitiv India Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as ‘RIPL’) and Refinitiv India Transaction Services Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as ‘RITSPL’) on a principal-to-principal basis. Under the said agreement, RIPL and RITSPL purchase the petitioner’s products for distribution in India and pay the consideration to petitioner in accordance with the distribution agreement. The payments so received by the petitioner fall for consideration under the provisions of the Act of 1961 and India-United Kingdom (‘UK’) Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (hereinafter referred to as ‘DTAA’)

4. In view of the nature of the services, which the petitioner-company provides to its Indian customers through its counterparts namely RIPL and RITSPL since no income chargeable to tax has been earned, an application dated 20.06.2025 under Section 197 of the Act of 1961 for AY 2026-27 was filed by the petitioner-Company, which was received by the competent authority on 23.06.2025 and came to be disposed of vide order dated 21.08.2025. Consequently, a tax withholding certificate dated 21.08.2025 at the rate of 15% tax came to be issued.

5. Mr. Ajay Vohra, learned senior counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner’s services are not taxable in India if the provisions of the Act of 1961 and the India-UK Treaty are taken into account and in spite of the fact that the petitioner had relied upon the judgment passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “I” Bench, Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal’) on 21.12.2020 for AYs 1998-99 and 1999-2000, the competent authority has surprisingly relied upon the assessment order for AY 1999-2000 and rejected its request of certificate at ‘NIL’ rate. He contended that the same is an example of arbitrary exercise of the statutory powers, which the competent authority has been bestowed with under the Act of 1961.

6. He submitted that even if the order of the Tribunal is kept aside for the time being, there is no trace of evidence on the basis whereof the services provided by the petitioner can be brought within the ambit of ‘Royalty’ for which the petitioner’s request of certificate at NIL rate can be de