{"id":190532,"date":"2010-04-28T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-04-27T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-viii-vs-ms-paradise-holidays-on-28-april-2010"},"modified":"2018-08-30T21:18:57","modified_gmt":"2018-08-30T15:48:57","slug":"commissioner-of-income-tax-viii-vs-ms-paradise-holidays-on-28-april-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-viii-vs-ms-paradise-holidays-on-28-april-2010","title":{"rendered":"Commissioner Of Income Tax-Viii vs M\/S Paradise Holidays on 28 April, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Delhi High Court<\/div>\n
Commissioner Of Income Tax-Viii vs M\/S Paradise Holidays on 28 April, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: V. K. Jain<\/div>\n
              THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI\n\n%                               Judgment Delivered on: 28.04.2010\n\n+            ITA 445\/2010\n\nCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-VIII                       ... Appellant\n\n\n                                - versus -\n\n\nM\/S PARADISE HOLIDAYS                                 ... Respondent<\/pre>\n
Advocates who appeared in this case:\n<\/p>\n
For the Appellant   : Ms Prem Lata Bansal
\nFor the Respondent  :\n<\/p>\n
CORAM:-\n<\/p>\n
HON’BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED
\nHON’BLE MR JUSTICE V.K. JAIN<\/p>\n
     1.    Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to
\n           see the judgment?                                        Yes\n<\/p>\n
     2.    To be referred to the Reporter or not?                   Yes<\/p>\n
     3.    Whether the judgment should be reported in Digest?       Yes<\/p>\n
V.K. JAIN, J.(ORAL)<\/p>\n
1.           This appeal is directed against the order of the Income<\/p>\n
Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 23.12.2008, whereby it dismissed<\/p>\n
the appeal, being ITA No.5028\/Del\/2007, filed by the appellant<\/p>\n
against the order passed by Commissioner                 of Income<\/p>\n
Tax(Appeals), in respect of assessment of the respondent, for<\/p>\n
the assessment year 2004-2005.\n<\/p>\n
2.            The assessee firm, which is engaged in the business<\/p>\n
of travel and tourism, as a tour operator arranging inland tour<\/p>\n
ITA No.445\/2010                                              Page 1 of 7<\/span>
\n of foreign tourists visiting India, filed its return declaring<\/p>\n
taxable income of Rs.42,53,536\/- for the assessment year<\/p>\n
2004-2005.           The net profit shown in the return was at 7.93%<\/p>\n
of the receipts.         Since the Assessing Officer felt that the net<\/p>\n
profit reported by the assessee was on lower side, he picked up<\/p>\n
the expenses relating to seven tours organized by the<\/p>\n
respondent. On a consideration of the accounts furnished by<\/p>\n
the assessee, the Assessing Officer felt that the assessee could<\/p>\n
not demonstrate any pattern as to uniformity of rates etc. and<\/p>\n
the expenses debited in the tour Ledger did not reconcile with<\/p>\n
the tour itinerary. He, therefore, rejected the book results in<\/p>\n
terms of Section 145(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and<\/p>\n
assessed the income @ 12% of gross foreign receipts. Net rate<\/p>\n
of 10% was applied by the Assessing Officer, to determine the<\/p>\n
income from Indian business receipts.\n<\/p>\n
3.                In the appeal filed by the assessee, Commissioner of<\/p>\n
Income Tax(Appeals) noted that not only the notices issued<\/p>\n
under Sections 142(1), 143(2) were complied with by the<\/p>\n
assessee, all the Books of Account and vouchers etc. were also<\/p>\n
produced before the Assessing Officer, for scrutiny by him. He<\/p>\n
also found that for all intents and purposes the assessment<\/p>\n
was complete under Section 143(3), though the Assessing<\/p>\n
ITA No.445\/2010                                                Page 2 of 7<\/span>
\n Officer purported to act under Section 144 of the Act. It was<\/p>\n
further noted by CIT(A) that the assessee had not suppressed<\/p>\n
any part of receipts and all the receipts were properly vouched.<\/p>\n
He also found that the receipts as well as the expenses of each<\/p>\n
tour were separately accounted for in the ledger account, and<\/p>\n
even gross profit arising in respect of each tour was properly<\/p>\n
ascertainable. He felt that the order passed by the Assessing<\/p>\n
Officer was based on presumptions and conjectures, without<\/p>\n
bringing any positive evidence on record.                  He, therefore,<\/p>\n
directed the Assessing Officer to accept the income returned by<\/p>\n
the appellant, after allowing deduction under Section 80 HHD.<\/p>\n
4.                The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal noted that<\/p>\n
though one reason assigned by the Assessing Officer for<\/p>\n
rejecting the Books of Account was that the net profit disclosed<\/p>\n
by the assessee was on the lower side considering the line of<\/p>\n
business in which it was engaged, no specific reasons of higher<\/p>\n
profit having been declared by any similarly situated assessee<\/p>\n
had not been found by the Assessing Officer.                The Tribunal<\/p>\n
accepted the contention of the assessee that considering the<\/p>\n
nature of business of the assessee, a formal agreement with<\/p>\n
the    foreign       principal   was   not   imperative.     As   regards<\/p>\n
reconciliation of the tour expenses with the tour itinerary, it<\/p>\n
ITA No.445\/2010                                                   Page 3 of 7<\/span>
\n was held that the itinerary was tentative for the purpose of<\/p>\n
fixing the charges but the same could be changed depending<\/p>\n
upon various factors, including the number of days of the<\/p>\n
entire tour, period of stay in a particular place, the quality of<\/p>\n
hotel services provided to the tourists and frequent travel of<\/p>\n
tourists from one place to another. The Tribunal felt that the<\/p>\n
exact bill could be raised only after execution of the tour<\/p>\n
programme and, therefore, could not have been compared with<\/p>\n
the agreement or contract note with the foreign principal in<\/p>\n
order to ascertain the correct income of the assessee.<\/p>\n
5.            Section 145(3) of Act provides for assessment in the<\/p>\n
manner prescribed in Section 144 of the Act where the<\/p>\n
Assessing Officer is not satisfied about the correctness or<\/p>\n
completeness of the accounts of the assessee or where either<\/p>\n
the method of accounting provided in sub-Section (1) or the<\/p>\n
accounting standards as notified under sub-Section (2) having<\/p>\n
been regularly followed by the assessee. It is not the case of<\/p>\n
the Revenue that the assessee had not followed either cash or<\/p>\n
mercantile system of accounting. It is also not the case of the<\/p>\n
Revenue that the Central Government had notified any<\/p>\n
particular accounting standards to be followed by tour<\/p>\n
operators.        Hence, the second part of sub-Section (3) of<\/p>\n
ITA No.445\/2010                                            Page 4 of 7<\/span>
\n Section 145 does not apply to this case.\n<\/p>\n
6.           The Assessing Officer has not pointed out any specific<\/p>\n
defect or discrepancy in the Account Books maintained by the<\/p>\n
assessee.         Admittedly, the assessee had been maintaining<\/p>\n
regular Books of Accounts, which were duly audited by an<\/p>\n
independent Chartered Accountant.         As noted by CIT(A), the<\/p>\n
financial results were fully supported by the assessee with<\/p>\n
vouchers and the Books of Account were complete and correct<\/p>\n
in all respects. The accounts which are regularly maintained<\/p>\n
in the course of business and are duly audited, free from any<\/p>\n
qualification by the auditors, should normally be taken as<\/p>\n
correct unless there are adequate reasons to indicate that they<\/p>\n
are incorrect or unreliable. The onus is upon the Revenue to<\/p>\n
show that either the Books of Accounts maintained by the<\/p>\n
assessee were incorrect or incomplete or method of accounting<\/p>\n
adopted by him was such that true profits of the assessee<\/p>\n
cannot be deduced therefrom.\n<\/p>\n
7.           The question as to whether the accounts produced by<\/p>\n
the assessee were defective\/incomplete or not is a question of<\/p>\n
fact.      The Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) as well as<\/p>\n
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal have found that the accounts<\/p>\n
maintained by the respondent were neither defective nor<\/p>\n
ITA No.445\/2010                                            Page 5 of 7<\/span>
\n incomplete. Even the Assessing Officer has not found any fault<\/p>\n
as such with the system of accounting being followed by the<\/p>\n
assessee. The Tribunal which is the final fact finding authority<\/p>\n
has held that considering the nature of the business of the<\/p>\n
assessee, it was not obligatory to enter into a formal agreement<\/p>\n
with the foreign principal.          Hence, non-production of formal<\/p>\n
agreements with the foreign principals would not render the<\/p>\n
accounts of the assessee incomplete and would not give<\/p>\n
justification to the Assessing Officer to reject them under<\/p>\n
Section 145(3) of the Act. Similarly, the explanation given by<\/p>\n
the assessee for the tour expenses not reconciling with tour<\/p>\n
itinerary having been accepted, both by Commissioner of<\/p>\n
Income Tax(Appeals) as well as by the Tribunal, the accounts<\/p>\n
of the assessee cannot be said to be defective on this ground<\/p>\n
and, therefore, could not have been rejected. If any particular<\/p>\n
expense claimed by the assessee remained unverified, the<\/p>\n
Assessing         Officer   could   have   disallowed   that   particular<\/p>\n
expense. But, that by itself cannot be a ground for rejection of<\/p>\n
accounts as a whole under Section 145(3) of the Act.                  The<\/p>\n
finding of fact recorded by the ITAT has not been shown to be<\/p>\n
perverse, and hence cannot be interfered with by this Court.<\/p>\n
8.            For the reasons given in the preceding paragraphs,<\/p>\n
ITA No.445\/2010                                                  Page 6 of 7<\/span>
\n no substantial question of law arises for our consideration.<\/p>\n
The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                         (V.K. JAIN)
\n                                           JUDGE<\/p>\n
                                   (BADAR DURREZ AHMED)
\n                                           JUDGE
\nAPRIL 28, 2010
\nRS\/<\/p>\n
ITA No.445\/2010                                        Page 7 of 7<\/span>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Delhi High Court Commissioner Of Income Tax-Viii vs M\/S Paradise Holidays on 28 April, 2010 Author: V. K. Jain THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Delivered on: 28.04.2010 + ITA 445\/2010 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-VIII … Appellant – versus – M\/S PARADISE HOLIDAYS … Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[14,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-190532","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-delhi-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nCommissioner Of Income Tax-Viii vs M\/S Paradise Holidays on 28 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-viii-vs-ms-paradise-holidays-on-28-april-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Commissioner Of Income Tax-Viii vs M\/S Paradise Holidays on 28 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-viii-vs-ms-paradise-holidays-on-28-april-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-04-27T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-08-30T15:48:57+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-income-tax-viii-vs-ms-paradise-holidays-on-28-april-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-income-tax-viii-vs-ms-paradise-holidays-on-28-april-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Commissioner Of Income Tax-Viii vs M\\\/S Paradise Holidays on 28 April, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-04-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-08-30T15:48:57+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-income-tax-viii-vs-ms-paradise-holidays-on-28-april-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1276,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Delhi High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-income-tax-viii-vs-ms-paradise-holidays-on-28-april-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-income-tax-viii-vs-ms-paradise-holidays-on-28-april-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-income-tax-viii-vs-ms-paradise-holidays-on-28-april-2010\",\"name\":\"Commissioner Of Income Tax-Viii vs M\\\/S Paradise Holidays on 28 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-04-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-08-30T15:48:57+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-income-tax-viii-vs-ms-paradise-holidays-on-28-april-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-income-tax-viii-vs-ms-paradise-holidays-on-28-april-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-income-tax-viii-vs-ms-paradise-holidays-on-28-april-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Commissioner Of Income Tax-Viii vs M\\\/S Paradise Holidays on 28 April, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Commissioner Of Income Tax-Viii vs M\/S Paradise Holidays on 28 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-viii-vs-ms-paradise-holidays-on-28-april-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Commissioner Of Income Tax-Viii vs M\/S Paradise Holidays on 28 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-viii-vs-ms-paradise-holidays-on-28-april-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-04-27T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-08-30T15:48:57+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-viii-vs-ms-paradise-holidays-on-28-april-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-viii-vs-ms-paradise-holidays-on-28-april-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Commissioner Of Income Tax-Viii vs M\/S Paradise Holidays on 28 April, 2010","datePublished":"2010-04-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-08-30T15:48:57+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-viii-vs-ms-paradise-holidays-on-28-april-2010"},"wordCount":1276,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Delhi High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-viii-vs-ms-paradise-holidays-on-28-april-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-viii-vs-ms-paradise-holidays-on-28-april-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-viii-vs-ms-paradise-holidays-on-28-april-2010","name":"Commissioner Of Income Tax-Viii vs M\/S Paradise Holidays on 28 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-04-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-08-30T15:48:57+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-viii-vs-ms-paradise-holidays-on-28-april-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-viii-vs-ms-paradise-holidays-on-28-april-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-viii-vs-ms-paradise-holidays-on-28-april-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Commissioner Of Income Tax-Viii vs M\/S Paradise Holidays on 28 April, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/190532","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=190532"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/190532\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=190532"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=190532"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=190532"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}