What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the applications for condonation of delay, subject to just exceptions. The appeals were then listed for further hearing on the merits of the case.

The Revenue sought condonation of delay in re-filing appeals before the High Court. The assessee did not object to the condonation of the 280-day delay.

What were the issues?

The primary issue for consideration was whether the Tribunal correctly concluded that the assessee did not have a Fixed Place PE or a Supervisory PE. The Revenue contended that the assessee had a Fixed Place PE due to premises owned by FCC Rico Ltd.

CIT vs Fcc Co. Ltd | Delhi High Court 2023

$~42, 43 & 45 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 441/2023 + ITA 442/2023 + ITA 444/2023 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -1

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

versus

FCC CO. LTD.

..... Respondent Through: Mr Prakash Kumar with Ms Rashmi Singh, Advocates.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER

HON'BLE MS JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU

O R D E R %

11.08.2023 [Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)] CM APPL. 41188/2023 in ITA 441/2023 1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions. CM APPL. 41189/2023 [Application filed on behalf of the appellant seeking condonation of delay of 280 days in re-filing the appeal] in ITA 441/2023 CM APPL. 41207/2023 [Application filed on behalf of the appellant seeking condonation of delay of 280 days in re-filing the appeal] in ITA 444/2023 2. These are applications filed on behalf of the appellant/revenue seeking condonation of delay in re-filing the appeal. 3. According to the appellant/revenue, there is a delay of 280 days in re- filing the appeals. ITA 441/2023 & connected appeals

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 13:11:13

Counsel for the respondent/assessee says that he would have no objection if the delay is condoned. 5. It is ordered accordingly. 6. The applications are disposed of, in the aforesaid terms. ITA 441/2023 ITA 442/2023 ITA 444/2023 7. The broad issue which arise for consideration in the matter is: whether the Tribunal has rightly concluded that the respondent/assessee neither has a Fixed Place PE nor a Supervisory PE? 8. According to Mr Ruchir Bhatia, learned senior standing counsel, who appears on behalf of the appellant/revenue, the respondent/assessee has a Fixed Place PE, as it had, at its disposal, the premises owned by FCC Rico Ltd. (FRL). 9. List the above-captioned appeals on 21.11.2023. 10. Counsel for the parties will file their written submissions, not exceeding three pages each, at least five days before the next date of hearing.

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J

TARA VITASTA GANJU, J

AUGUST 11, 2023 / tr

Click here to check corrigendum, if any ITA 441/2023 & connected appeals

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 13:11:13

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -1 vs. FCC CO. LTD.

What did the High Court hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments