COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -1 vs. ERICSSON, AB SWEDEN

$~26, 30 & 31 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 679/2023 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -1

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

versus

ERICSSON, AB SWEDEN

..... Respondent

Through: Mr Vishal Kalra, Advocate.

+ ITA 683/2023 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -1

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

versus

ERICSSON, AB SWEDEN

..... Respondent

Through: Mr Vishal Kalra, Advocate.

+ ITA 684/2023 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -1

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

versus

ERICSSON, AB SWEDEN

..... Respondent

Through: Mr Vishal Kalra, Advocate.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER

HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

O R D E R %

04.12.2023 [Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)]

ITA 679/2023 & connected appeals

page 1 of 4 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 13:31:38

CM APPL. 62181/2023 in ITA 679/2023 CM APPL. 62194/2023 in ITA 684/2023 1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions. CM APPL. 62182/2023 [Application filed on behalf of the appellant seeking condonation of delay of 460 days in re-filing the appeal] in ITA 679/2023 CM APPL. 62191/2023 [Application filed on behalf of the appellant seeking condonation of delay of 460 days in re-filing the appeal] in ITA 683/2023 CM APPL. 62195/2023 [Application filed on behalf of the appellant seeking condonation of delay of 460 days in re-filing the appeal] in ITA 684/2023 2. These are applications filed by the appellant/revenue, seeking condonation of delay in re-filing the appeal. 3. Although the period of delay is substantial i.e., 460 days, most of it appears to have been explained by reference to a judgment of the Supreme Court rendered in SMW(C) 3 of 2020, titled In Re: Cognizance for Extension of Limitation. 4. Having regard to the same, Mr Vishal Kalra, learned counsel, who appears on behalf of the respondent/assessee, says that he would have no objection if the delay in re-filing is condoned. 5. It is so directed. The above-captioned applications are accordingly disposed of. ITA 679/2023 ITA 683/2023 ITA 684/2023 6. These appeals concern Assessment Years (AY) 2002-03 [ITA 679/2023], AY 1999-2000 [ITA 683/2023] and AY 2000-01 [ITA 684/2023]. ITA 679/2023 & connected appeals