Blog Categories
All Posts
Accounting Standard 12
CBDT 1
Chartered Accountant 1
Chartered Engineer 1
Greetings 1
Income Tax Act 2025 0
Labour Law 2
MCA Notification 1
MSME 1
NGO- Trust & Society 0
PLACEMENT 1
Press Information Bureau, Government of India (PIB) 2
RBI & Banks 1
RERA 0
RTI 1
STUDENT ICAI 2
Virtual Webinar 5
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
Bureau of Indian Standards vs. Director General of Income Tax (Exemptions) – Section 10(23C)(iv) Exemption and Interpretation of “Charitable Purpose” under Section 2(15), Income Tax Act, 1961
Facts of the
CaseThe Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS), a statutory
body under the BIS Act, 1986, was granted income tax exemption under Section
10(23C)(iv) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Director General of Income T...
Commissioner of Income Tax vs M/S M.S. International Ltd., M/S Shoes East Ltd., and Pearl Intercontinental Ltd.: Deduction Under Section 80HHC & Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) – Delhi High Court, 2012
Facts of the
CaseThe appeals before the Delhi High Court were filed
by the Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) under Section 260A of the Income Tax
Act, 1961, involving multiple assessees: M/S M.S. International Ltd., M/...
M/s Swarovski India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax | Delhi High Court Quashes Section 148 Reassessment Due to Change of Opinion
Facts of the
CaseThe original assessment for the assessment year
2006-07 was completed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on
December 4, 2009. Subsequently, the petitioner moved an application under
Se...
Commissioner of Income Tax vs M.S. International Ltd & Ors | Deduction under Section 80HHC & Penalty under Section 271(1)(c)
Facts of the
Case:The appeals were filed by the
Commissioner of Income Tax under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961,
against various companies including M.S. International Ltd., M.S. Shoes East
Ltd., and Pearl ...
PR. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central-2) v. Aqua Guard Marketing Pvt. Ltd. ITA Nos. 752/2015 & 753/2015 | Delhi High Court | Dismissal of Appeals | Section 260A
Facts of the
Case:The case involves two Income Tax Appeals (ITA Nos.
752/2015 and 753/2015) filed by the appellant, the PR. Commissioner of
Income Tax (Central-2), against the Aqua Guard Marketing Pvt. Ltd.
(Responde...
"Pro Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Vijay Conductors India Pvt. Ltd., Namrata Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Vishrut Marketing Pvt. Ltd., and Beriwal Investment & Chit Fund Pvt. Ltd. - Section 68 of Income Tax Act - Deletion of Additions by ITAT"
Facts of the Case:
The case involves multiple appeals by the Revenue (Pro Commissioner of Income
Tax) against the decision made by the ITAT concerning the deletion of additions
under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act. ...
Commissioner of Income Tax vs M/S M.S. International Ltd. & Ors.: Deduction under Section 80HHC vs Income Tax Authorities
Facts of the
Case
The appellants, Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT), challenged
deductions claimed by the respondents (M/S M.S. International Ltd., M.S.
Shoes East Ltd., Pearl Intercontinental Ltd.) under S...
Delhi High Court Upholds Deduction Under Section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act for Genuine Export Transactions
Facts of the
Case:
The assessees were export-oriented companies claiming deductions
under Section 80HHC for the export of synthetic rubber sole sheets to Taj
Al Khaleej General Trading Co., Dubai.
The a...
PR. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central-2) vs. M/s Mevron Projects Pvt. Ltd. (ITA Nos. 745, 746, 748, 749, 750 of 2015) - Validity of Assessment under Section 153C Following Amalgamation
Facts of the
CaseThe Revenue filed five appeals against a common
order by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) dated 20th February 2015, for
the Assessment Years (AYs) 2003-04, 2005-05, 2006-07, 2007-08, and 2008-...
Assessment of Income Tax Liability on Respondent’s Income – ITA 583/2010 (Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Urmila Lodhi)
Facts of the
Case
The respondent, Urmila Lodhi, was assessed by the Income Tax
Department.
The assessment involved the determination of her taxable income and
applicable deductions.
The Commissioner ...