COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI XVII vs ROYAL JORDANIAN AIRLINES

Judgment text excerpt

$~8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : 22.01.2026 + ITA 187/2008 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI XVII .....Appellant Through: Mr. Vipul Agrawal, SSC and Mr. Gaoraang Ranjan, Adv. versus ROYAL JORDANIAN AIRLINES .....Respondent Through: Mr. Anil Makhija, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR JUDGMENT DINESH MEHTA, J. (ORAL) 1. Mr. Vipul Agrawal, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant/Income Tax Department submitted that the issue involved in the present case is squarely covered in favour of Revenue by the judgment of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Singapore Airlines Ltd. reported in 2009 SCC OnLine Del 823 as affirmed by Hon’ble the Supreme Court in the case of Singapore Airlines Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, reported in (2023) 1 Supreme Court 497. 2. Learned counsel submitted that in light of the adjudication made by this Court and affirmed by Hon’ble the Supreme Court, the appeal deserves to be allowed. ITA 187/2008 Page 1 of 4 Signature Not Verified Signed By:PRAMOD KUMAR VATS Signing Date:23.01.2026 14:51:51 3. Learned counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, submitted that since the tax effect in the instant case is about Rs.26,00,000/-, the appeal deserves to be dismissed in light of Circular No. 5/2024 read with Circular No. 9/2024 issued by Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT). 4. At this juncture, Mr. Agrawal submitted that as the case falls within the ambit of exception, inasmuch as sub-clause l of Clause 3.1 of the Circular No. 5/2024 covers the instant case because the present case is that of TDS between two parties. 5. Mr. Anil Makhija, learned counsel for the respondent-assessee while maintaining that the appeal deserves to be dismissed, however, alternat