ITAT Ranchi Judgments — March 2023

M/S. SRIRAM POWER & STEEL PVT. LTD.,RAMGARH vs PR. CIT(C), PATNA, PATNA

ITA 20/RAN/2021[2010-11]Status: Disposed31 Mar 2023AY 2010-11Allowed

The Tribunal held that the PCIT's revisionary jurisdiction was invalid because the assessment year was unabated and no incriminating material was found during the search. Therefore, the AO could not have made additions, and consequently, the PCIT could not direct such examination in revision.

M/S BHARAT COOKING COAL LIMITED,DHANBAD vs ACIT CIRCLE-1, DHANBAD

ITA 290/RAN/2017[08-09]Status: Disposed31 Mar 2023Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that unabsorbed depreciation could be carried forward and set off without limit as per the Finance Act, 2001 amendment. It also directed the deletion of an addition related to contractual expenses where the assessee later provided complete details and the AO found no discrepancy.

ACIT CIR-1, DHANBAD vs M/S BHARAT COKING COAL LTD, DHANBAD

ITA 298/RAN/2017[08-09]Status: Disposed31 Mar 2023Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that unabsorbed depreciation could be carried forward and set off without limit as per the Finance Act, 2001 amendment. It also directed the deletion of an addition related to contractual expenses where the assessee later provided complete details and the AO found no discrepancy.

M/S. SRIRAM POWER & STEEL PVT. LTD.,RAMGARH vs PR. CIT(C), PATNA, PATNA

ITA 21/RAN/2021[2011-12]Status: Disposed31 Mar 2023AY 2011-12Allowed

The Tribunal held that the PCIT's revisionary jurisdiction was invalid because the assessment year was unabated and no incriminating material was found during the search. Therefore, the AO could not have made additions, and consequently, the PCIT could not direct such examination in revision.

M/S VED TEXTILES & APPARELS,RANCHI vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, RANCHI, RANCHI

ITA 50/RAN/2021[2017-18]Status: Disposed29 Mar 2023AY 2017-18Dismissed

The Tribunal held that deduction under Section 36(1)(va) for delayed deposit of employees' contribution to PF/ESI cannot be claimed even if deposited before the due date of filing the return, as per the Supreme Court's decision in Chekmate Services Pvt. Ltd.

ALOK KUMAR KHAITAN,RANCHI vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, RANCHI, RANCHI

ITA 51/RAN/2021[2018 -19]Status: Disposed29 Mar 2023Dismissed

The Tribunal held that deduction under Section 36(1)(va) for delayed deposit of employees' contribution to PF/ESI cannot be claimed even if deposited before the due date of filing the return, as per the Supreme Court's decision in Chekmate Services Pvt. Ltd.

SHAMBHU SHARAN GIRI,LAKHANSAI NOAMUNDI BAZAR vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, 47, C.H. AREA, JAMSHEDPUR

ITA 16/RAN/2022[2018-19]Status: Disposed29 Mar 2023AY 2018-19Partly Allowed

The Tribunal found the 50% disallowance excessive and unreasonable. It held that a 5% disallowance would be fair and reasonable, setting aside the higher disallowance made by the lower authorities.

SRI RAJENDRA KUMAR AGARWAL,DHANBAD vs PR. CIT, DHANBAD

ITA 205/RAN/2019[2014-15]Status: Disposed23 Mar 2023AY 2014-15Withdrawn

The Tribunal granted the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal. Consequently, the appeal filed by the assessee was dismissed as withdrawn.