ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-4, NEW DELHI vs. HINDUSTAN COCA-COLA BEVERAGES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 6298/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 January 2025AY 2015-16Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)29 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal allowed the assessee's grounds regarding traffic challans and customer deposits, following previous coordinate bench decisions. The penalty for wrong waybills was dismissed, with liberty to reapply if the issue is settled favorably. The Revenue's appeal regarding delayed PF/ESI payments was allowed, following a Supreme Court decision.

What were the facts?

The assessee and Revenue filed cross-appeals concerning AYs 2014-15, 2015-16, and 2016-17. The appeals involved issues such as disallowance of traffic challans, deposits from customers, CSR expenditure, penalties for wrong waybills, and delayed payment of employee contributions to PF/ESI.

What were the issues?

The key issues were the allowability of expenses like traffic challans and customer deposits, the deductibility of CSR expenditure, and the treatment of penalties for violations of VAT law. The appeals also addressed the disallowance of delayed payments of employee contributions to provident funds and ESI.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 37,Section 43B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)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.

Before: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN & SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIALMEMBER

For Appellant: Shri Sachit Jolly, Advocate, Ms. Soumya Singh, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu,CITDR
Hearing: 22.10.2024

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No.6508/DEL/2018
ITA No.6298/DEL/2018

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM :

1.

These cross appeals filed by the assessee and Revenue are against the separate orders of ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-35, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to ‘Ld. CIT (A)’) dated 25.07.2018, 25.07.2018 and 29.05.2019 for AYs 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2016-17 respectively.

2.

Since the issues are common and

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 37

All 4,334 judgments and leading authorities on Section 37 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →