Facts of the
Case
The Income Tax Department preferred multiple appeals before the
Delhi High Court against the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal.
There was a delay of 86 days in filing t...
Facts of the
CaseThe petitioners, being real estate developers,
builders, and financial institutions, had entered into long-term lease
agreements (90 years) with the Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority
(GN...
Facts of the
CaseThe petitioners, being real estate developers and
banking institutions, entered into long-term lease agreements of 90 years with
Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority (GNOIDA) for devel...
Facts of the
CaseThe Income Tax Department preferred multiple
appeals before the Delhi High Court against the order of the Income Tax
Appellate Tribunal dated 21.03.2016. The appeals were filed with a delay of 86
day...
Facts of the CaseThe Income Tax Department preferred multiple
appeals before the Delhi High Court against the order passed by the Income Tax
Appellate Tribunal dated 21.03.2016. However, the appeals were filed with a
...
Facts of the
Case
The Revenue preferred multiple appeals against the order of the
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.
There was a delay of 86 days in filing the appeals before
the High Court.
Applications...
Facts of the CaseThe Revenue preferred appeals before the Delhi High
Court challenging the order passed in favour of Gunvardhan Vyapar Pvt. Ltd. The
dispute arose in the context of assessment proceedings under Section ...
Facts of the
CaseThe assessee, Rollatainers Ltd., was engaged in
multiple business divisions including packaging, paper board, machinery
manufacture, specialty paper, and machine trading. During the relevant
assessme...
Facts of the
CaseThe Revenue preferred appeals against the assessee
challenging the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The dispute
arose from assessment proceedings initiated pursuant to search proceed...
Facts of the
Case
The petitioner is a multinational company engaged in multiple
projects in India.
The Revenue authorities held that the petitioner had a Permanent
Establishment (PE) in India and was li...