M/S MILLENIUM CONSULTANTS& SERVICE PROVIDERS,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT, ALLAHABAD

ITA 138/ALLD/2010Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad30 September 2021AY 2005-0613 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s addition of Rs. 50,000 on account of sale of prospectus, finding the assessee failed to discharge its onus. However, it allowed the deduction for expenditure where TDS was deposited before the due date of filing the return, following the Supreme Court's decision in CIT v. Calcutta Export Company.

What were the facts?

The assessee firm, engaged in distance education services, was assessed for AY 2005-06. The Assessing Officer (AO) made additions regarding income from sale of prospectus and disallowed expenditure due to late TDS deposit. The CIT(A) granted partial relief on both counts.

What were the issues?

Whether income from sale of prospectus was correctly accounted for by the assessee, and whether expenditure is allowable as a deduction when TDS was deposited late but before the due date of filing the return.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 40(a)(ia),Section 139(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(7)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ALLAHABAD BENCH, ALLAHABAD

Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO & SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR

Hearing: 31.08Pronounced: 30.09.2021

PER SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

This appeal, filed by assessee, being ITA No.138/Alld./2010, is directed against an appellate order dated 06.05.2010 in Appeal No. 40/DCIT/R-I/Alld/07- 08 passed by learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Allahabad (hereinafter called "theCIT(A)"), for assessment year(ay):2005-06, the appellate proceedings had arisen before learned CIT(A) from assessment order dated 20th December, 2007 passed by learned Assessing Officer (hereinafter called "the AO") under Section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act,1961(hereinafter called “ the Act”) .

We have heard both the parties through video confere

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 40(a)(ia)

All 7,300 judgments and leading authorities on Section 40(a)(ia) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →