THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -CENTRAL -1 vs. PEPSICO INDIA HOLDING PVT. LTD.

$~18 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 167/2023

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -CENTRAL -1

..... Appellant Through: Mr Ruchir Bhatia, Sr Standing Counsel.

versus

PEPSICO INDIA HOLDING PVT. LTD.

..... Respondent

Through: Ms Priya Tandon, Advocate. CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU

O R D E R %

21.03.2023 [Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)] CM Appl.13549/2023 1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions. CM Appl.13550/2023[Application filed on behalf of the appellant seeking condonation of delay of 250 days in re-filing the appeal] 2. This is an application moved on behalf of the appellant/revenue seeking condonation of delay in re-filing the appeal. 2.1 According to the appellant/revenue, there is a delay of 250 days. 3. Ms Priya Tandon, who appears on behalf of the respondent/assessee, does not oppose the prayer made in the application. 4. The delay is, accordingly, condoned. 5. The application is disposed of, in the aforesaid terms.

ITA 167/2023

1/3 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 14:25:47

ITA 167/2023 6. This appeal concerns Assessment Year (AY) 2008-09. 7. Broadly, there are three issues which arise for our consideration: (i) Whether the disallowance made under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, the “Act”] can exceed the exempt income? (ii) Whether the disallowance made under Section 14A of the Act can be added to book profit under clause (f) of Explanation 1 appended to Section 115JB(2) of the Act? (iii) Whether depreciation can be allowed on capitalized non- compete fee? 8. Mr Ruchir Bhatia, learned senior standing counsel, who appears on behalf of the appellant/revenue, says that insofar as the first issue involving Section 14A of the Act is concerned, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short, the “Tribunal”] for AYs 2005-06 to 2007-08 has ruled against of the appellant/revenue. 8.1 Mr Bhatia also informs us that the appeal preferred to this court by the appellant/revenue was closed. 9. Therefore, even according to Mr Bhatia, only the second and third issues, indicated above, arise for consideration. 10. Accordingly, notice shall issue, limited to the second and third issue. 10.1 Ms Priya Tandon accepts notice on behalf of the respondent/assessee. 11. List the matter on 18.09.2023.

ITA 167/2023

2/3 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 14:25:47

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J

TARA VITASTA GANJU, J

MARCH 21, 2023/pmc

Click here to check corrigendum, if any

ITA 167/2023

3/3 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 14:25:47