THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -1 vs. AMADEUS IT GROUP SA
What did the High Court hold?
The Delhi High Court condoned the delay in re-filing the appeal. The court found no substantial question of law arose as the issue was covered by a previous decision.
What were the facts?
The Revenue filed an appeal against an ITAT order for AY 2009-10. The Revenue sought condonation of a 300-day delay in re-filing the appeal, which the assessee did not object to.
What were the issues?
Whether a substantial question of law arises for consideration when the issue is covered by a prior High Court judgment.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
$~79 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ ITA 298/2023 & CM Nos.27436-37/2023
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -1
..... Appellant Through: Mr Ruchir Bhatia, Sr Standing Counsel with Mr Pratyaksh Gupta, Standing Counsel.
versus
AMADEUS IT GROUP SA
..... Respondent Through: Ms Kavita Jha and Mr Udit Naresh, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA
O R D E R %
23.05.2023 [Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)] CM No.27437/2023 [Application filed on behalf of the appellant seeking condonation of delay of 300 days in re-filing the appeal] 1. This is an application filed 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 300 days. 2. Mr Udita Naresh, who appears on behalf of the respondent/assessee, says that he has no objection if the prayer made in the application is allowed. 3. Accordingly, the delay is condoned. 4. The application is, accordingly, disposed of. ITA 298/2023
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 14:34:40
CM No.27436/2023 5. Allowed, subject to just exceptions. ITA 298/2023 6. This appeal concerns Assessment Year (AY) 2009-10. 7. The appellant/revenue has laid a challenge to the order dated 26.10.2020 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short, “Tribunal”]. 8. Mr Pratyaksh Gupta, learned standing counsel, who appears on behalf of the appellant/revenue, says that the issue raised in the instant appeal stands covered by the decision of this court dated 04.05.2023, passed in ITA No.254/2023. 9. Given this circumstance, according to us, no substantial question of law arises for our consideration. 10. The appeal is, accordingly, closed.
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J
GIRISH KATHPALIA, J
MAY 23, 2023
Click here to check corrigendum, if any
ITA 298/2023
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 14:34:40
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sushama Mishra vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Saudamini Samantray vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Bhubaneswar IiOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Keshav Rice Mill, Ganjam vs. Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, KatakaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Nanda Contruction PVT. LTD., Angul vs. Additional Commissioner, GST And Central Excise Commissionerate, SundergarhOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Utkal Suppliers,Ganjam vs. Assistant Commissioner Of CT And GST, Ganjam-I Circle,GanjamOrissa · 28 Oct 2026