What did the High Court hold?

The High Court condoned the delay in filing and re-filing the appeal. It prima facie found no substantial question of law arising for consideration, given the ITAT's factual findings.

The Revenue filed an appeal with a significant delay. The assessee did not object to the condonation of delay. The High Court noted that the ITAT had made factual findings regarding the absence of a Permanent Establishment, business connection, and royalty.

What were the issues?

Whether a substantial question of law arises from the ITAT's findings that the assessee had no Permanent Establishment or business connection in India and that software use did not constitute royalty.

CIT vs Siemens Mobile Communication Spa | Delhi High Court 2023

$~39 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 491/2023 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -3

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

versus

SIEMENS MOBILE COMMUNICATION SPA ..... Respondent

Through: Mr Deepak Chopra, Advocate.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER

HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

O R D E R %

31.08.2023 [Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)] CM APPL. 45023/2023 1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions. CM APPL.45022/2023 [Application filed on behalf of the appellant seeking condonation of delay of 24 days in filing the appeal] CM APPL.45024/2023 [Application filed on behalf of the appellant seeking condonation of delay of 400 days in re-filing the appeal] 2. These are applications filed by the appellant/revenue seeking condonation of delay in filing and re-filing the appeal. 3. According to the appellant/revenue, there is a delay of 24 days in filing and 400 days in re-filing the appeal. 4. Counsel for the respondent/assessee says that he would have no objection if the delay is condoned. ITA 491/2023

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 28/03/2026 at 05:18:02

For the reasons given in the applications, the delay in filing and re- filing the appeal is condoned. 6. The applications are disposed of. ITA 491/2023 7. Prima facie, it appears that no question of law arises for our consideration as the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short, “Tribunal”] via order dated 30.09.2019 appears to have returned findings of the fact regarding the following issues: (i) The respondent/assessee has no Permanent Establishment [in short, “PE”] in India. (ii) Respondent/assessee has no business connection in India. (iii) The use of software cannot constitute royalty. 8. Faced with this, Mr Ruchir Bhatia, learned senior standing counsel who appears on behalf of the appellant/revenue says that he would like to place the subject agreement on record and file brief submissions as well. 8.1 Leave in that behalf is granted. 8.2 Mr Deepak Chopra, who appears on behalf of the respondent/assessee will do likewise. 9. List the appeal on 17.11.2023.

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J

GIRISH KATHPALIA, J

AUGUST 31, 2023 / tr

Click here to check corrigendum, if any ITA 491/2023

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 28/03/2026 at 05:18:02

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -3 vs. SIEMENS MOBILE COMMUNICATION SPA

What did the High Court hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Latest GST High Court judgments