Blog Categories
Subscribe to Newsletter
Join our subscribers list to get the latest Tax Updates and Opportunities.
Knowledge Portal
Click here to explore deep insights, FAQs, and comprehensive tax guides.
Explore Now
Showing filtered results. Clear filters
Commissioner of Income Tax vs Assessee – Exemption under Sections 11 & 12 of the Income-tax Act Upheld; Revenue Appeals Dismissed by Delhi High Court
Facts of the CaseThe Revenue preferred appeals before the Delhi High
Court challenging the grant of exemption under Sections 11 and 12 of the
Income-tax Act, 1961 to the assessee. The issue involved in the present appe...
Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Salora International Ltd. [2010] 2010:DHC:2509-DB (Delhi High Court) MAT Credit Under Section 115JAA Must Be Allowed Before Levy of Interest Under Sections 234B & 234C – Debatable Issue Cannot Be Rectified Under Section 154 | Delhi High Court
Facts of the CaseSalora International Ltd. was granted MAT Credit
under Section 115JAA while processing its return.An intimation under Section 143(1) dated
29.09.2000 resulted in a refund being granted to the ass...
St. Lawrence Educational Society (Regd.) & Another vs Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi (Central) & Another | Section 10 | Delhi High Court
Facts of the
CaseThe petitioners, namely St. Lawrence Educational
Society (Regd.) and The Baptist Educational Society, were societies registered
under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 and were engaged in imparting...
Raj Kumar Mangla vs. Commissioner of Income Tax [2010] 2010:DHC:2544-DB (Delhi High Court) Rectification Application Under Section 154 Cannot Be Rejected Without Personal Hearing – Delhi High Court Sets Aside CIT(A) Order and Directs Fresh Adjudication
Facts of the CaseRaj Kumar Mangla filed writ proceedings
challenging certain actions taken by the Income Tax Department.The petitioner raised two principal grievances
before the Delhi High Court.Issue Relating to...
Raj Kumar Mangla vs. Commissioner of Income Tax [2010] 2010:DHC:2543-DB (Delhi High Court) Opportunity of Hearing Mandatory Before Disposal of Rectification Application Under Section 154 – Delhi High Court Directs Fresh Hearing by CIT(A) | Sections 154 & 127(2) Income-tax Act
Facts of the CaseThe petitioner, Raj Kumar Mangla, appeared before
the Delhi High Court in person and challenged certain actions taken by the
Income Tax Department.The petitioner raised two principal grievances.F...
Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Baldev Raj Charla [2010] 2010:DHC:2571-DB (Delhi High Court) Capital Gains on Sale of Company Property Assessable Only in Hands of Company and Not Director – Section 49(1) Not Applicable to Family Arrangement Involving Corporate Assets | Delhi High Court
Facts
of the CaseAmbitious
Gold Nibs Company Private Limited acquired an industrial property measuring
approximately 2829 square yards situated at C-101, Maya Puri Industrial Area,
Delhi, from the Delhi Develop...
St. Lawrence Educational Society (Regd.) & Another v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi (Central) & Another | The Baptist Educational Society & Anr. v. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax [Delhi High Court]
Facts of the
Case
The petitioner societies were registered educational societies
engaged in running schools.
Applications in Form No. 56D were submitted seeking approval under
Section 10(23C)(vi) of the ...
Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Jyoti Charla [2010] 2010:DHC:2569-DB (Delhi High Court) I Capital Gains on Sale of Company-Owned Property Taxable Only in Hands of Company and Not Directors – Section 49(1) Inapplicable to Family Arrangement | Delhi High Court
Facts of the CaseAmbitious Gold Nibs Company Private Limited
acquired an industrial property measuring approximately 2829 square yards
situated at C-101, Maya Puri Industrial Area, Delhi, from the Delhi Developme...
Galileo International Inc. vs Director of Income Tax | Delhi High Court Clarifies Taxability of Permanent Establishment (PE) Income and Deduction of Expenses
Facts of the
Case
The assessee filed appeals relating to different assessment years.
The primary controversy was whether the assessee had a Permanent
Establishment (PE) in India.
The lower authorities, after...
Ericsson AB vs Additional Director of Income Tax, Range-1, International Taxation, New Delhi [Delhi High Court] – Assessee Must First Exhaust Remedy Before Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) Under Section 144C of the Income-tax Act, 1961
Facts
of the Case• Ericsson AB challenged a draft
assessment order passed under Section 144C(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for
Assessment Year 2007-08.• The petitioner contended that
the Assessing Officer had fa...