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

$~33 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 688/2023 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -1

..... Appellant Through: Mr Ruchir Bhatia, Sr. Standing Counsel with Ms Deeksha Gupta, Adv.

versus

ERICSSON, AB SWEDEN

..... Respondent

Through: Mr Vishal Kalra, Adv.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

O R D E R %

05.12.2023 [Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)] CM APPL. 62542/2023 1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions. CM APPL. 62543/2023 [Application filed on behalf of the appellant seeking condonation of delay of 460 days in re-filing the appeal] 2. This is an application 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 referring to the judgment of the Supreme Court rendered in Suo Motu Writ Petition No. 03 of 2020. 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. The above-captioned application is accordingly disposed of.

ITA 688/2023

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 13:33:38

ITA 688/2023 6. This appeal concerns Assessment Year (AY) 2001-02. 7. Via the instant appeal, the appellant/revenue seeks to assail the order dated 27.10.2021 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short, “Tribunal”]. 8. Mr Ruchir Bhatia, learned senior standing counsel, who appears on behalf of appellant/revenue, informs us that the impugned order was common not only to the Assessment Year (AY) in issue but also 1999-2000, which was subject matter of ITA No. 684/2023. 9. Via order dated 04.12.2023, we have issued notice concerning one of the two questions proposed in the said appeal. Mr Bhatia points out that the questions proposed in the instant appeals are identical. 10. Accordingly, issue notice limited to the following question. Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal misdirected itself on facts and in law in concluding that the respondent/assessee neither had in India a business connection concerning supply of GSM System to Cellular Operators nor a Permanent Establishment (PE) and therefore no profit could be attributed to it ? 10.1. Mr Vishal Kalra, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent/assessee. 11. List the above-captioned appeal on 10.04.2024, along with the connected ITA referred to hereinabove. RAJIV SHAKDHER, J

GIRISH KATHPALIA, J DECEMBER 5, 2023/RY Click here to check corrigendum, if any

ITA 688/2023

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 13:33:38