INCOME TAX OFFICER, BANGALORE vs. M/S.DUSTERS TOTAL SOLUTIONS SERVICES PVT. LTD., BANGALORE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal, following the jurisdictional High Court's decision on belated PF/ESI contributions. The Tribunal allowed the assessee's cross objections regarding Section 14A disallowance, relying on a co-ordinate bench decision.
What were the facts?
The revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order allowing deduction for belated PF and ESI contributions. The assessee filed cross objections challenging the disallowance under Section 14A despite no exempt income.
What were the issues?
Whether belated remittance of PF and ESI contributions is eligible for deduction. Whether Section 14A disallowance is warranted in the absence of exempt income.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show listHide 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.
- 279 ITR 331/149 Taxman 15 (Guj.); 5. CIT v. Sabari Enterprises706 citing298 ITR 141 · 2008 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH, BENGALURU
Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO & SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO
This is an appeal filed by the revenue directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-2, Bengaluru,[CIT(A)], dated 15/06/2016 for the assessment year 2013-14. The assessee has filed cross objections.
The revenue raised the following grounds of appeal:
4. The only issue in the present appeal is whether belated remittance of PF and ESI contribution under respective laws but within due date for filing of return of income is eligible for deduction. This issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee-company by the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sabari Enterprises (298 ITR 141). The CIT(A), following the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the above case allowed the appeal. Therefore, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the CIT(A). Hence, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed.
5. The cross objections filed by the assessee challenge the finding of the CIT(A) that 14A disallowance is warranted even in absence of exempt income. Now, the issue is squarely covered by the ITAT decision in & 1482/Bang/2015 dated 09/06/2017 in the case of the assessee for the assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12. In the light of the co-ordinate bench decision, the cross objections filed by the assessee are allowed.
More judgments on Section 14A
- Blacksoil Capital Private Limited (As… vs DCIT, Circle-1(1), HyderabadITA 2217/HYD/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Hiral Construction, Mumbai vs ITO Ward 42(1)(2), MumbaiITA 8431/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- The Dy DIT (It) 1(2), Mumbai vs M/S Citi Bank N.A, MumbaiITA 4981/MUM/2007[2002-2003]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2002-2003
- M/S. Citi Bank N.A., Mumbai vs The Addl DIT (It) RG-1, MumbaiITA 4970/MUM/2007[2002-2003]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2002-2003
- M/S American Express Bank Ltd., Mumbai vs The Jt DIT (It)1(1), MumbaiITA 9414/MUM/2004[2000-2001]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2000-2001
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Abdhish Dhal Samanta, Bhubaneswar vs. Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Kniit Net Industries Private Limited, Khurda vs. Superintendent Of CGST And Central Excise, Bhubaneswar Ii CircleOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Swarnapai Chemicals (Opc) Private Limited, Cuttack vs. Sales Tax Officer, Cuttack IOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S. Middlex, Puri vs. Commnr. Of State Tax, Banijyakar Bhawan, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Sunadei Indane Gramin Vitrak, Nayagarh vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, Cuttack, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026