What did the High Court hold?

The High Court has adjourned the hearing of the appeal to a future date. The court has also allowed an application for interim relief, subject to the appellant filing legible copies of annexures.

The appellant is challenging an ITAT order for AY 2012-13. The appellant argues that the ITAT relied on decisions from AYs 2009-10 and 2011-12, for which rectification applications were pending.

What were the issues?

Whether the ITAT erred by relying on prior year decisions when rectification applications were pending for those years. The issue of interim relief was also considered.

Kraft Heinz Foods Company-Earlier… vs CIT | Delhi High Court 2023

$~29 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 789/2023, CM APPL. 66054/2023 & 66055/2023

KRAFT HEINZ FOODS COMPANY-EARLIER KNOWN AS H.J.HEINZ COMPANY, USA ..... Appellant

Through: Mr Salil Kapoor with Mr Vibhu Jain,

Ms Ananya Kapoor and Mr Sumit

Lalchandanni, Advs.

versus

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX – INTERNATIONAL TAX-2

..... Respondent

Through: Mr Shivansh B. Pandya, Standing

Counsel and Utkarsh Tiwari, Adv. for

Mr Sunil Agarwal, Sr. Standing

Counsel.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

O R D E R %

19.12.2023

[Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)] CM No. 66054/2023 1. Allowed, subject to the appellant filing legible copies of the annexures, at least three (3) days before the next date of hearing. ITA 789/2023 & CM No.66055/2023 [Application filed on behalf of the appellant seeking interim relief] 2. This appeal concerns Assessment Year (AY) 2012-13. 3. Via, the instant appeal, the appellant/assessee seeks to assail the order dated 01.08.2023 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short, “Tribunal”]. ITA 789/2023

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 14:16:40

Mr Salil Kapoor, learned counsel, who appears on behalf of the appellant/assessee, informs us that, apart anything else, the impugned order is flawed as it relies upon decisions rendered for AYs 2009-10 and 2011-12, concerning the appellant/assessee, even when Miscellaneous Applications (MAs) have been moved, qua the above-mentioned years for rectification of mistakes apparent from the record, in which orders have been reserved. 4.1 Mr Kapoor emphasises that the Tribunal ought to have waited for the decision in the MAs reserved by the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal. 5. Since accommodation is sought on behalf of Mr Sunil Agarwal, learned senior standing counsel, who appears on behalf of respondent/revenue, list the matter on 08.01.2024.

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J

GIRISH KATHPALIA, J DECEMBER 19, 2023/RY

Click here to check corrigendum, if any

ITA 789/2023

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 14:16:40

KRAFT HEINZ FOODS COMPANY-EARLIER KNOWN AS H.J.HEINZ COMPANY, USA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -INTERNATIONAL TAX-2

What did the High Court hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments