<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Government company exemption under section 10(26B) upheld where State control and incorporation documents established eligibility.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=99083</link>
    <description>A Government company wholly controlled by the State Government through the Governor, with power to appoint and remove directors, was treated as eligible for exemption under section 10(26B) on the basis of its incorporation documents and memorandum and articles of association. The Tribunal followed the co-ordinate bench view in the assessee&#039;s own case and accepted that the company was established by the State, so its income was exempt. As the Revenue did not dispute the foundational facts and only raised res judicata, the Tribunal found no error in deleting the additions as non-taxable and upheld the exemption.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 23 Apr 2026 11:00:33 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Apr 2026 11:00:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=898051" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Government company exemption under section 10(26B) upheld where State control and incorporation documents established eligibility.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=99083</link>
      <description>A Government company wholly controlled by the State Government through the Governor, with power to appoint and remove directors, was treated as eligible for exemption under section 10(26B) on the basis of its incorporation documents and memorandum and articles of association. The Tribunal followed the co-ordinate bench view in the assessee&#039;s own case and accepted that the company was established by the State, so its income was exempt. As the Revenue did not dispute the foundational facts and only raised res judicata, the Tribunal found no error in deleting the additions as non-taxable and upheld the exemption.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 23 Apr 2026 11:00:33 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=99083</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>