Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
$~25 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 16/2023
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI-4
..... Appellant
Through: Mr Vipul Agarwal, Advocate.
versus
M/S INTERGLOBE TECHNOLOGY QUOTIENT PVT. LTD.
..... Respondent Through: Mr Rohit Jain with Mr Aniket D. Agrawal and Mr Aditya Vohra, Advocates.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
HON'BLE MS JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU
O R D E R %
13.01.2023 [Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)] CM APPL. 1355/2023
Allowed, subject to just exceptions. CM APPL. 1356/2023[Application filed on behalf of the appellant seeking condonation of delay of 123 days in re-filing the appeal] 2. This is an application filed on behalf of the appellant seeking condonation of delay in re-filing the appeal. 2.1. Accordingly the counsel for the appellant/applicant, the delay involved is 123 days. 3. The counsel for the respondent/non-applicant does not oppose the prayer made in the application. 4. The delay in re-filing is, accordingly, condoned. 5. The application is disposed of in the foresaid terms.
ITA 16/2023
page 1 of 3
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/03/2026 at 14:00:18
ITA 16/2023 6. Ordinarily, this matter would have been transferred to another bench, since one of us i.e., Rajiv Shakdher, J. would not have heard the matter. However, the counsels for the parties, say that no substantial question of law arises for consideration insofar as this court is concerned, and therefore transferring the matter to another bench would be pointless. 7. This appeal concerns Assessment Year (AY) 2014-15 i.e., Financial Year (FY) 2013-14. 8. Mr Vipul Agarwal, who appears on behalf of the appellant/respondent, fairly, puts forth that the impugned order dated 30.12.2020 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short, Tribunal] is covered against the appellant/revenue by the judgment of the coordinate bench of this court dated 22.05.2017 passed in the respondent’s/assessee’s case i.e., ITA 330/2017 (concerning AY 2010-11). 8.1. Mr Agarwal also informs us that a Special Leave Petition (SLP) against the said judgement has been preferred which is pending adjudication. In this behalf, our attention has been drawn to ground D of the appeal, wherein there is a reference to the Diary No. 17893/2018 [sic: 13833/2018] allocated by the Supreme Court to the SLP filed by the appellant/ revenue. 9. Mr Agarwal as well as Mr Rohit Jain, learned counsel for the respondent/assessee submits that parties will abide by the decision in the SLP. 10. Statement of counsel is taken on record. Accordingly, the appeal is
ITA 16/2023
page 2 of 3 This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/03/2026 at 14:00:18
closed. Consequently, the pending application shall also stand closed.
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J
TARA VITASTA GANJU, J
JANUARY 13, 2023 / tr
Click here to check corrigendum, if any
ITA 16/2023
page 3 of 3
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/03/2026 at 14:00:18