THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -3 vs. ZEBRA TECHNBOLOGIES ASIA PACIFIC PET. LTD.

PDF
ITA - 792 / 2023HC Delhi20 December 20233 pages
For Petitioner: RUCHIR BHATIA

No AI summary yet for this case.

%

20.12.

2023

[Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)] CM APPL. 66315/2023 [Application filed on behalf of the appellant seeking condonation of delay of 90 days in refiling the appeal]

1.

This is an application moved on behalf of the appellant/revenue, seeking condonation of delay in re-filing the appeal.

1.

1 According to the appellant/revenue, there is a delay of 90 days in re- filing the appeal.

2.

Mr Ajay Vohra, learned senior advocate, who appears on behalf of the respondent/assessee, says that he does not oppose the prayer made in the application.

3.

Accordingly, the delay is condoned.

4.

The application is disposed of.

ITA 792/2023

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 12:33:40

ITA 792/2023

5.

This appeal concerns Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18. 6. Via the instant appeal, the appellant/revenue seeks to assail the order dated 28.02.2023, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short “Tribunal”].

7.

The Tribunal has set aside the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) dated 25.03.2022, passed under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short “Act”].

8.

One of the issues that arises for consideration is: whether the respondent/assessee has indulged in treaty abuse? The CIT has concluded that there has been treaty abuse by the respondent/assessee.

8.

1 In this regard, reference has been made to the holding company i.e., Zebra Jersey Holding Ltd. located in Jersey, which is a tax haven. Concededly, the ultimate holding company, i.e., Zebra Technologies India Pvt. Ltd. is located in the US.

9.

Mr Vohra has emphasized that the respondent/assessee is a tax resident of Singapore and has been, accordingly, issued the Tax Residency Certificate (TRC).

9.

1 According to Mr Vohra, the appellant/revenue cannot look beyond the TRC. It is submitted that the respondent/assessee does not have a Permanent Establishment (PE) in India.

10.

Furthermore, Mr Vohra says that the issue concerning treaty abuse was not put to the respondent/assessee in the course of proceedings carried out by the CIT.

11.

Given this submission, we would like Mr Ruchir Bhatia, learned ITA 792/2023

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 12:33:40

senior standing counsel, who appears on behalf of the appellant/revenue, to place on record the order sheets concerning the proceedings carried out by the CIT.

11.

1 Furthermore, liberty is granted to Mr Bhatia to place before the court the materials which, according to him, are relevant for the disposal of the instant appeal.

12.

Needless to add, copies of the same will be furnished to Mr Bajpai, Advocate, who appears along with Mr Vohra, for the respondent/assessee.

13.

List the above-captioned matter on 01.03.2024. RAJIV SHAKDHER, J

GIRISH KATHPALIA, J DECEMBER 20, 2023 MS

Click here to check corrigendum, if any

ITA 792/2023

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 12:33:40