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
PR. Commissioner of Income Tax–18 vs Maharani of India (ITA 872–878/2017) | Delhi High Court | Low Tax Effect Appeals Dismissed under CBDT Circular No. 3/2018
Facts of the
CaseThe Revenue filed multiple appeals before the Delhi
High Court for Assessment Years 2003–2004 to 2007–2008 against the respondent,
Maharani of India. These appeals were filed under Section 260A of...
PR. Commissioner of Income Tax-18 vs Maharani of India (Delhi High Court) – ITA 872–878/2017 | Low Tax Effect Appeals Dismissed under CBDT Circular No. 3/2018
Facts of the
CaseThe Revenue (Principal Commissioner of Income
Tax-18) filed multiple appeals before the Delhi High Court against the
respondent (Maharani of India) for Assessment Years 2003–2004 to 2007–2008.Duri...
PR. Commissioner of Income Tax-18 vs Maharani of India | Delhi High Court | Low Tax Effect Appeals Dismissed under CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 (Sections 260A, Income Tax Act)
Facts of the CaseThe present matter pertains to a batch of income tax appeals filed by the Revenue (PR. Commissioner of Income Tax-18) before the Delhi High Court concerning Assessment Years 2003–2004 to 2007–2008. T...
Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation) – Reassessment Valid for Non-Disclosure of Royalty & FTS Income under Sections 147/148 of Income Tax Act
Facts of the
CaseThe assessee, Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., a
non-resident company incorporated in South Korea, filed appeals under Section
260A challenging the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal’s order which upheld th...
Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation) – Reassessment Valid on Non-Disclosure of Royalty & FTS Income under Sections 147/148 of Income Tax Act
Facts of the
Case
The assessee, a South Korea-based company, operated in India
through:
An Indian subsidiary engaged in manufacturing and trading consumer
electronics.
A branch office engaged i...
PR. Commissioner of Income Tax-18 vs Maharani of India | Delhi High Court | Low Tax Effect Appeals Dismissed under CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 Section 260A, Income Tax Act, 1961
Facts of the
CaseThe Revenue filed multiple appeals before the Delhi
High Court concerning assessment years 2003–2004 to 2007–2008. During the
hearing, counsel for the Revenue submitted that the tax effect involve...
PR. Commissioner of Income Tax–6 vs National Housing Bank (Delhi High Court) – Section 36(1)(viii) & 271(1)(c) | Bona Fide Claim & Penalty for Concealment
Facts of the
Case
The respondent-assessee, National Housing Bank (NHB), is wholly
owned by RBI and engaged in promoting housing finance.
NHB claimed deduction under Section 36(1)(viii) for creating a
...
PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL-3) vs ORIENTAL PATHWAYS (NAGPUR) PVT. LTD. | Section 271(1)(c) Penalty on Depreciation Claim under Section 32 – Delhi High Court
Facts of the
Case
The assessee was engaged in development and operation of highways
under BOT model and collected toll revenue.
It claimed depreciation @10% on roads under Section 32,
which was initiall...
Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax–Central-3 vs Oriental Pathways (Nagpur) Pvt. Ltd. | Delhi High Court | Section 271(1)(c) Penalty on Depreciation Claim under BOT Projects
Facts of the CaseThe assessee, Oriental Pathways (Nagpur) Pvt.
Ltd., was engaged in infrastructure development under the Build-Operate-Transfer
(BOT) model, specifically constructing and maintaining highways and
...
PR. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central-3) vs. Sanjeev Dhingra (Delhi High Court, 2018) – Appeal Dismissed Due to Low Tax Effect under CBDT Circular No. 3/2018
Facts of the
CaseThe Revenue filed multiple appeals before the Delhi
High Court against the respondent assessee, Sanjeev Dhingra. During the
hearing, counsel for the Revenue submitted that the tax effect involve...