What did the High Court hold?

The High Court has adjourned the hearing of these appeals. The court noted that an appeal concerning AY 2012-13, which had DRP findings in favor of the assessee, was also being filed.

The appeals concern Assessment Years 2013-14 and 2014-15 and assail a common order of the ITAT. The revenue argues that the ITAT relied on DRP findings for AY 2012-13, which were in favor of the assessee, while for the current AYs, the DRP concluded to the contrary.

What were the issues?

The primary issue is the reliance of the ITAT on DRP findings for a different assessment year, and whether the findings for the current assessment years were correctly decided in light of the previous year's DRP decision.

CIT vs Sojitz Corporation | Delhi High Court 2023

$~30 & 33 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 446/2023 + ITA 449/2023 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -3

..... Appellant Through: Mr Ruchir Bhatia, Sr Standing Counsel with Ms Deeksha Gupta, Adv.

versus

SOJITZ CORPORATION

..... Respondent Through: Mr Ved Kumar Jain with Mr Nischay Kantoor, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA

O R D E R %

14.08.2023 [Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)] CM Appl.41519/2023 in ITA 446/2023 1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions. ITA 446/2023 ITA 449/2023 2. These appeals concern Assessment Years (AYs) 2014-15 [ITA 446/2023] and 2013-14 [ITA 449/2023]. 3. The above-captioned appeals assail a common order dated 26.12.2022 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short, “Act”]. 4. Mr Ruchir Bhatia, learned senior standing counsel, who appears on

ITA nos.446/2023 & 449/2023

1/2 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 14:03:06

behalf of the appellant/revenue, says that apart from anything else, the Tribunal while passing the impugned order dated 26.12.2022, relied upon the findings of the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) rendered qua AY 2012- 13. 4.1 To be noted, the DRP‟s finding on that the issues concerning AY 2012-13 are in favour of the respondent/assessee. 5. In the AYs in issue, i.e., 2013-14 and 2014-15, the DRP, it appears, has concluded to the contrary. 6. Mr Bhatia says that an appeal has been lodged with the Registry of this court, with regard to the decision taken by the Tribunal qua AY 2012- 13. 7. We are told that the said appeal is likely to be listed, on and about 04.09.2023. 8. Accordingly, at the request of the counsel for the parties, list the above-captioned matters on 22.09.2023. 9. If an appeal is lodged, as indicated above by Mr Bhatia, qua AY 2012-13, the Registry will list that appeal on the date given in the instant appeals.

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J

NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J

AUGUST 14, 2023/pmc

Click here to check corrigendum, if any

ITA nos.446/2023 & 449/2023

2/2 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 14:03:06

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -3 vs. SOJITZ CORPORATION

What did the High Court hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments