$~7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 975/2026, CM APPL. 4721/2026, CM APPL. 4722/2026 &

CM APPL. 4723/2026 EMERALD PUBLISHING LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Sonu Bhatnagar, Sr. Adv.

versus DEPUTY CORNMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX.....Respondent Through: Mr. Debesh Panda, SSC and Adv.

Anauntta Shankar, Adv.

CORAM:

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

O R D E R

% 03.02.2026

1. The instant writ petition impugns the order dated 08.11.2025 passed by the office of Circle Int Tax 1(2)(2) (hereinafter referred to as competent authority) and certificate dated 08.11.2025 issued under Section 197 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act of 1961’) whereby a tax withholding certificate at the rate of 15% has been issued to the petitioner against its request of certificate of nil deduction.

2. As per the facts pleaded, the petitioner Emerald Publishing Limited ('the Assessee' or 'Company') an entity incorporated under the laws of United Kingdom ('UK') is a tax resident of the UK. The Company is engaged in publication of academic journals and books (in the area of business and management including social sciences, engineering, linguistics and audiology), digital case studies and licensing the use of its journals to third parties from outside India to customers in India and various other countries.

3. During the year under consideration, the Company has entered into agreements with Indian customers for providing access to online database and expecting to derive revenue from Indian customers, which is not chargeable to tax in India as Royalty or Fees for technical services ("FTS"), as it merely provides access to standardized database which is in the nature of subscription made to a journal and no part of copyright is transferred.

4. The petitioner has also asserted that the Company does not have any permanent establishment ("PE") or fixed place of business in India and the Company is not providing any services in India through its employee or personnel. As per the submission of the petitioner, the revenue from providing access to online database in the form of subscription is not taxable as FTS both under the Act and under the provisions of Article 13 of the India UK tax treaty since the make available clause is not satisfied, absence of human intervention, no transfer of right to apply technology and in any case does not amount to technical knowledge, know-how, experience, skills or process being made available.

5. As per the petitioner, the key features of the agreement are as follows:

 It grants the non-exclusive, non-transferable subscription right to the customer during the term of the agreement to access various licensed products.

 The company does not permit the subscribers or any other party to:

 Use any part of the licensed materials for any commercial or business purpose;

 Make print or electronic copies of multiple extracts or make multiple copies of any part of the licensed materials for any purpose;

 Download or distribute any part of the licensed materials;

 Prepare, publish or distribute the information contain in the database;

or  Alter, abridge, adapt or modify the information containing in the database for any purpose.

 All rights, titles and interest in the licensed material remain with the petitioner.

 Petitioner is not obligated to provide access to the updated or revised contents of the licensed products to the customers following the end of subscription period.

6. Ms. Sonu Bhatnagar, learned senior counsel for the petitioner submitted that while moving the application under Section 197 and claiming a withholding tax certificate of 0% for the Financial Year 2025-26, the petitioner had clearly indicated that the transaction carried out by it are not taxable in India and that it does not have any PE in India.

7. While relying upon judgments of this Court rendered in case of Ovid Technologies Inc v DCIT [2025] 176 Taxmann.com 557 and other judgments in her support,