PCIT-7 Vs Tata Teleservices Ltd. (Supreme Court of India)
Summary: The Supreme Court dismissed the Special Leave Petition filed by the Revenue against the Delhi High Court’s decision in PCIT-7 v. Tata Teleservices Ltd. on account of a gross delay of 201 days. The Court held that the reasons assigned for seeking condonation of delay were neither satisfactory nor sufficient in law. It consequently dismissed the delay-condonation application and, as a result, the Special Leave Petition itself on the ground of delay. The Supreme Court expressly left open the questions of law, if any, and therefore did not examine or affirm the Delhi High Court’s decision on merits.
Read HC Judgment in this case: Delhi HC Dismisses Revenue Appeal on Issue Covered by Earlier Rulings
The underlying appeal before the Delhi High Court had been filed by the Revenue against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The respondent submitted that the issue stood covered against the Revenue by the Delhi High Court’s judgment in PCIT v. Sahara India Life Insurance Company Ltd., reported in 432 ITR 84 (Delhi). The High Court was also informed that Revenue appeals involving an identical issue had been dismissed in Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Corteva Agriscience Pvt. Ltd., ITA Nos. 344/2025, 345/2025, 349/2025 and 350/2025.
The Delhi High Court noted that the Tribunal had relied upon Sahara India Life Insurance Company Ltd. and that the Revenue had not brought any contrary material to its attention. It accordingly held that no substantial question of law arose for consideration and dismissed the Revenue’s appeal along with the pending applications. Although the Revenue subsequently approached the Supreme Court, its challenge was dismissed solely as time-barred. Consequently, the Delhi High Court’s order remains undisturbed in the case, but the substantive questions of law were expressly left open by the Supreme Court.
Cases Discussed:
- PCIT v. Sahara India Life Insurance Company Ltd., 432 ITR 84 (Delhi) — Relied upon by the Tribunal and treated by the Delhi High Court as covering the issue against the Revenue.
- Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Corteva Agriscience Pvt. Ltd., ITA Nos. 344/2025, 345/2025, 349/2025 and 350/2025 — Delhi High Court had dismissed Revenue appeals involving an identical issue.
FULL TEXT OF THE SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT/ORDER
We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
Mr. Sumit Lal Chandan, learned counsel for the respondent, who is present before the Court.
There is a gross delay of 201 days in filing the Special Leave Petition.
The reasons assigned for condonation of delay are neither satisfactory nor sufficient in law so as to condone the same.
Hence, the application seeking condonation of delay is dismissed.
Consequently, the Special Leave Petition is dismissed on the ground of delay leaving open the questions of law, if any.
Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
