Dismissed

Commissioner of Income Tax, International TAXATION-1, Delhi v. Eicr (Cyprus) Ltd.

Delhi HC1 Apr 2026ITA/272/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Income tax appeal by the Revenue against a Cyprus-incorporated assessee regarding eligibility under Section 144C. Following a co-ordinate Bench decision in Rolland Enterprises Ltd., the appeal was dismissed, with liberty to the Assessing Officer to show the assessee is ineligible in future years. Delay in re-filing was condoned.

What the court decided

AI extract

Commissioner of Income Tax, International TAXATION-1, Delhi Vs Eicr… — Income Tax | Delhi HC (2026)

¶1

$~30

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- ITA 272/2026, CM APPL. 20659/2026 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-1, DELHI .....Appellant Through: Mr. Puneet Rai, SSC, Mr. Ashvini Kr. & Mr. Rishabh Nangia, JSCs.

¶4

versus

¶5

EICR (CYPRUS) LTD. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Vaibhav Kulkarni, Mr. Himanshu Aggarwal, Advs.

¶6

CORAM:

¶7

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR

¶8

O R D E R

¶9

% 01.04.2026

¶10

CM APPL. 20660/2026 (delay in re-filing)

¶11

Present application has been filed by the applicant-appellant seeking condonation of delay of 43 days in re-filing the appeal.

¶12

For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed. Delay of 43 days in re-filing the appeal is condoned.

¶13

Application stands disposed of.

¶14

ITA 272/2026

¶15

Mr. Puneet Rai, learned senior standing counsel for the appellant fairly submitted that the facts and even the persons involved in the present appeal are identical to those in ITA 556/2024 (The Commissioner of Income Tax-International Taxation-3 v. Rolland Enterprises Ltd.) , decided by the co-ordinate Bench on 02.12.2024.

¶16

This is a digitally signed order.

¶17

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 06/04/2026 at 10:48:42

¶18

Having so submitted, learned senior standing counsel pointed out that there is sort of concession recorded by the Court in para no. 7 of the order dated 02.12.2024, according to which an impression can be drawn for a subsequent year that the respondent-assessee is an eligible assessee under Section 144C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as „the Act of 1961‟) . He submitted that the issue as to whether the respondent-assessee is an eligible assessee or not may be left open to be examined by the Assessing Officer (AO) in future years, if the occasion so arises.

¶19

Mr. Vaibhav Kulkarni, learned counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, submitted that the respondent-assessee is incorporated in Cyprus i.e., outside India, and that is the only relevant consideration for deciding the status as an eligible assessee for the purpose of Section 144C(1) of the Act of 1961.

¶20

While dismissing the present appeal in light of the order dated 02.12.2024 in the case of Rolland Enterprises Ltd. (supra), we make it clear that in case the AO can justifiably demonstrate that the assessee is not eligible, he will be free to take such view in accordance with law.

¶21

Pending application also stands disposed of.

DINESH MEHTA, J

VINOD KUMAR, J

APRIL 1, 2026/ck

This is a digitally signed order.

¶26

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 06/04/2026 at 10:48:42

Commissioner of Income Tax, International TAXATION-1, Delhi v. Eicr (Cyprus) Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Commissioner of Income Tax, International TAXATION-1, Delhi v. Eicr (Cyprus) Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Surya Food and Agro Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax Circle 22(2), Delhi & Ors.

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -15, Delhi Vs Nivesh Group

Surya Food and Agro Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax Circle 22(2), Delhi & Ors.

Alka Agarwal Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 28, Delhi & Anr.

Nemi Chand Jain Vs Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors.

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax 12 Vs M/S Remfry and Sagar