THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -2 vs. STANDARD CHARTERED GRINDLAYS PTY LTD.

PDF · subscribers
ITA - 143 / 2023HC Delhi14 March 20232 pages
For Petitioner: RUCHIR BHATIA
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal held that expenses directly concerning the Indian business are not subject to Section 44C of the Income Tax Act. The High Court noted this finding of fact and adjourned the hearing for further clarification.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer disallowed expenditure incurred by the assessee for its Indian business outside India. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld this disallowance, but the Tribunal reversed it.

What were the issues?

Whether expenses incurred for Indian business outside India are allowable deductions. Applicability of Section 44C to such expenses.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 44C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~22 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ ITA 143/2023

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -2

..... Appellant

Through: Mr Ruchir Bhatia, Sr. Standing

Counsel.

versus

STANDARD CHARTERED GRINDLAYS PTY LTD.... Respondent

Through: None.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU

O R D E R %

14.03.2023 [Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)] 1. This appeal concerns Assessment Year (AY) 2003-04. 2. Via this appeal, challenge is laid to the order dated 01.08.2022 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short, “the Tribunal”]. 3. The record shows, that the Assessing Officer (AO) has disallowed the expenditure incurred by the respondent/assessee for the Indian business outside India. 4. The Tribunal has found, as a matter of fact, that the expenses in issue which were disallowed were attributable to the business in India. 5. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), however, sustained the view taken by the AO, which as noticed above, was reversed by the Tribunal. ITA 143/2023

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 13:10:51

6.

It was the Tribunal’s view, that the cost/expenses directly concerning the Indian business would not be subjected to the provisions of Section 44C of the Act. This finding of fact is recorded in paragraph 4 to 6 of the impugned order. 7. Mr Ruchir Bhatia, learned senior standing counsel, who appears on behalf of the respondent/revenue, will place on record the certificate issued by KPMG, which according to us, will shed light on the issue at hand. 8. Mr Bhatia seeks an accommodation, on the ground that he did not expect the matter to be listed today. 9. Accordingly, list the matter on 12.04.2023.

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J

TARA VITASTA GANJU, J

MARCH 14, 2023/pmc

Click here to check corrigendum, if any

ITA 143/2023

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 13:10:51

More judgments on Section 44C

All 152 judgments and leading authorities on Section 44C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →