Loading ITAT cases…
15 orders · Page 1 of 1
The Tribunal held that where PF and ESI dues are paid after the due date under the respective statutes but before filing the return of income, they cannot be disallowed under Section 43B read with Section 36(1)(va) of the Income Tax Act, following jurisdictional High Court decisions.
The Tribunal held that payments of ESI and PF contributions made after the due date under respective acts but before filing the return of income under Section 139(1) cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or Section 36(1)(va) of the IT Act, following jurisdictional High Court decisions.
The Tribunal held that disallowance under Section 36(1)(va) and 43B is not permissible if employee contributions to PF and ESI are paid before the due date of filing the return of income, following jurisdictional High Court decisions.
The Tribunal held that payments of ESI and PF contributions made after the due date under respective acts but before filing the return of income under Section 139(1) cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or Section 36(1)(va) of the IT Act, following jurisdictional High Court decisions.
The Tribunal held that if employee contributions to PF/ESI are deposited before the due date of filing the return of income, they cannot be disallowed under Section 43B read with Section 36(1)(va) of the Act, following jurisdictional High Court decisions.
The Tribunal held that disallowances for delayed deposit of employees' contributions to ESI & PF are not permissible if deposited before the due date of filing the return of income, following the jurisdictional High Court's decisions.
The Tribunal held that disallowances for delayed deposit of employees' contributions to ESI & PF are not permissible if deposited before the due date of filing the return of income, following the jurisdictional High Court's decisions.
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. Following its own prior decisions and those of the jurisdictional Rajasthan High Court, the Tribunal held that disallowances for delayed payment of employee PF/ESI contributions, if paid before the return filing date, are not permissible under Section 43B read with Section 36(1)(va) of the Act.
The Tribunal held that where PF and ESI dues are paid after the due date under respective statutes but before filing the return of income, they cannot be disallowed under Section 43B read with Section 36(1)(va) of the Act. The Tribunal followed its previous decisions on identical issues.
The Tribunal held that the disallowance of employee contributions to PF and ESI paid after the due date but before the filing of the return of income is not permissible, following jurisdictional High Court decisions. The issue of brought forward business losses was remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals. It held that additions made under Section 68 based solely on bank statements are invalid, as bank statements are not considered 'books of accounts' for this purpose. The Tribunal also noted that the assessment order did not specify the section under which additions were made.
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals. It held that additions made under Section 68 based solely on bank statements are invalid, as bank statements are not considered 'books of accounts' for this purpose. The Tribunal also noted that the assessment order did not specify the section under which additions were made.
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals. It held that additions made under Section 68 based solely on bank statements are invalid, as bank statements are not considered 'books of accounts' for this purpose. The Tribunal also noted that the assessment order did not specify the section under which additions were made.
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals. It held that additions made under Section 68 based solely on bank statements are invalid, as bank statements are not considered 'books of accounts' for this purpose. The Tribunal also noted that the assessment order did not specify the section under which additions were made.
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals. It held that additions made under Section 68 based solely on bank statements are invalid, as bank statements are not considered 'books of accounts' for this purpose. The Tribunal also noted that the assessment order did not specify the section under which additions were made.