What did the High Court hold?

The High Court condoned the delay in re-filing the appeals. The court admitted the appeals for consideration on a specific question of law.

The appellant sought condonation of a 217-day delay in re-filing their appeals concerning Assessment Year 2010-11. The High Court heard arguments from both parties regarding the appeals.

What were the issues?

Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in treating royalty and sales commission as separate international transactions requiring independent benchmarking using the Comparable Uncontrolled Price Method.

Johnson Matthey India Private Ltd vs DCIT | Delhi High Court 2023

$~22 & 23 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 65/2023 & CM APPL. 5178-5180/2023 + ITA 66/2023 & CM APPL. 5348-5350/2023

JOHNSON MATTHEY INDIA PRIVATE LTD ..... Appellant Through: Mr Sumit Mangal, Adv. with Mr Mayank Aggarwal and Ms Anukrati Gupta, Advs.

versus

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CIRCLE 13(2) & ANR.

..... Respondent

Through: Mr Shailendera Singh, Adv.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER

HON'BLE MS JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU

O R D E R %

03.02.2023 [Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)] CM APPL No. 5179/2023 in ITA 65/2023 CM APPL No. 5349/2023 in ITA 66/2023 1. Allowed, subject to the appellant filing legible copies of the annexures, at least three days before the next date of hearing. CM APPL No. 5180/2023 in ITA 65/2023 CM APPL No. 5350/2023 in ITA 66/2023 [Applications filed on behalf of the appellant seeking condonation of delay of 217 days in re-filing the appeal] ITA 65/2023 and connected matter

Page 1 of 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 14:14:38

These are the applications filed on behalf of the appellant seeking condonation of delay in re-filing the appeals. 3. According to the appellant, there is a delay of 217 days in re-filing of the appeals. 4. For the reasons given in the applications, the delay is condoned. 5. Accordingly, the applications are disposed of. ITA 65/2023 ITA 66/2023 6. These appeals concern Assessment Year (AY) 2010-11. 7. We have heard the counsel for the parties. According to us, the following question of law requires consideration: Whether Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that royalty and sales Commission paid were separate and independent international transactions which were required to be benchmarked separately by applying the Comparable Uncontrolled Price Method?

Accordingly, the above-captioned appeals are admitted. 9. List the above-captioned appeals in the category of Regulars, as per age and seniority.

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J

TARA VITASTA GANJU, J

FEBRUARY 3, 2023/SA

Click here to check corrigendum, if any

ITA 65/2023 and connected matter

Page 2 of 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 14:14:38

JOHNSON MATTHEY INDIA PRIVATE LTD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CIRCLE 13(2) & ANR.

What did the High Court hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments