Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
$~28 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ ITA 38/2023 & CM Nos.2669-70/2023
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-2
..... Appellant Through: Ms Easha Kadian, Adv. for Mr Sanjay Kumar, Sr. Standing Counsel.
versus
M/S MITSUI AND CO.
..... Respondent
Through: Mr Ved Jain and Mr Nischay, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU
O R D E R %
20.01.2023 [Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)] CM No.2669/2023 1. This is an application moved on behalf of the appellant/revenue seeking condonation of delay in re-filing the appeal. 1.1 According to the appellant/revenue, there is a delay of 150 days. 2. Mr Ved Jain, who appears on behalf of the respondent/assessee, says that he does not oppose the prayer made in the application. 3. Accordingly, the delay is condoned. 4. The application is disposed of. CM No.2670/2023 5. Allowed, subject to just exceptions.
ITA 38/2023
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 14:16:12
ITA 38/2023
A request for accommodation is made on behalf of Mr Sanjay Kumar, who appears on behalf of the appellant/revenue. 6.1 Mr Jain, who appears on behalf of the respondent/assessee, does not oppose the request for accommodation. 7. The record reveals, that this matter concerns Assessment Year (AY) 2009-2010. 8. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short, “Tribunal”] in the impugned order dated 04.01.2022 has adverted to its earlier decision pertaining to AYs 2006-2007 to 2008-2009. Based on its earlier decision for the said years, it has ruled in favour of the respondent/assessee. 9. Broadly, the Tribunal has concluded that even if MITSUI India Pvt. Ltd. (MIPL) is held to be a Dependent Agent Permanent Establishment (DAPE) of the respondent/assessee, no income arising in India could be attributed to the respondent/assessee. 10. At this stage, we are informed by Mr Jain, that in AY 2005-2006, the coordinate bench of this Court, following an earlier decision dated 12.10.2017 passed in ITA No.902/2009, titled Director of Income Tax v. MITSUI & Co. Ltd. has ruled in favour of the respondent/assessee. 11. List the matter on 31.01.2023.
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J
TARA VITASTA GANJU, J
JANUARY 20, 2023/
Click here to check corrigendum, if any ITA 38/2023
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 14:16:12