TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (3) TMI 1450
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed 17.03.2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [hereinafter called, "ITAT"]. The ITAT has inter-alia held that the inter-connection usage charges paid to Foreign Telecom Operator(s) are neither 'Royalty' nor 'Fees' for Technical Services. 2.1 The same issue arises in 3 other connected Appeals filed for different AY's, being ITA 232 of 2020, ITA 234 of 2020 and ITA 235 of 2020 all of which have been heard together. 3. On 24.12.2020, a Coordinate Bench of this Court issued a limited notice in the Application for condonation of delay; CM APPL No. 34737 of 2020. Given the substantial delay in filing the Appeal, the Appellant/Revenue filed an Affidavit dated 10.10.2022 [hereinafter called "Additional Affidavit"] seek....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the filing of the Appeal in this Court. Reference was drawn to the earlier orders passed by the Coordinate Benches of this Court including orders dated 15.03.2021, 13.08.2021, 30.11.2021 28.03.2022, 18.07.2022, 29.08.2022 20.10.2022 and 01.12.2022 and on the last date of hearing on 10.03.2023. 7.1 Mr Vohra emphasises that prior to any decision on merits, the Appellant/Revenue has to explain the huge delay of 4 years and 100 days in filing of the Appeal. Reliance has been placed by the Respondent/Assessee on the decisions of the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh and Ors. Vs. Bherulal (2020) 10 SCC 654 and Union of India Vs. Vodafone Mobile Phone Ltd. 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1580 to submit that where there is an unexplained and inor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 4. That since both the matters involve substantial and far reaching questions of law, the Appellant seeks to file the present appeal to enable consistency of the views and to avoid any legal objection to the same". 9.1 This aspect has already been dealt with by this Court in its order dated 10.03.2023. The ITAT chose to rely not on the decision of the Bangalore Bench but on the decisions of the jurisdictional High Court in the matter of DIT v. New Skies Satellite BV [2016] 382 ITR 114 (Delhi) and Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co. Ltd. v. Director of Income Tax [2011] 332 ITR 340 (Delhi). Thus, on 10.03.2023, the Court had, recorded the following with respect to the Application for condonation of delay: "4. A perusal of the co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....after the filing of the Appeal, the Appellant/Revenue has taken adjournments on almost each date of hearing over the last two years. 13. So far as concerns, the reliance placed by the Appellant/Revenue on the Additional Affidavit, a perusal of order dated 29.08.2022 passed by a Coordinate Bench is apposite to be referred to here. The said order is reproduced below:- "Though this Court was inclined to dispose of the matters today itself, yet on persistent requests made by Mr. Sunil Kumar Agarwal, learned senior standing counsel for the appellant, last and final opportunity is granted to the revenue to file an affidavit within four weeks. List on 20th October, 2022. It is made clear that no adjournment shall be granted on the next date of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....idated by the judgment of this Court in Postmaster General v. Living Media (India) Ltd. [Postmaster General v. Living Media (India) Ltd., (2012) 3 SCC 563 : (2012) 2 SCC (Civ) 327 : (2012) 2 SCC (Cri) 580 : (2012) 1 SCC (L&S) 649] wherein the Court observed as under: (Postmaster General case [Postmaster General v. Living Media (India) Ltd., (2012) 3 SCC 563 : (2012) 2 SCC (Civ) 327 : (2012) 2 SCC (Cri) 580 : (2012) 1 SCC (L&S) 649] , SCC pp. 573-74, paras 27-30) "27. It is not in dispute that the person(s) concerned were well aware or conversant with the issues involved including the prescribed period of limitation for taking up the matter by way of filing a special leave petition in this Court. They cannot claim that they have a separate....