242 (Kar.) (iii) Yum Restaurant India P. Ltd., (2015) 371 ITR 139 (Del.) (iv) CIT v. Nipso Poly Fabriks Ltd.

371 ITR 164High Court2015#7886 most cited

What is 242 (Kar.) (iii) Yum Restaurant India P. Ltd., (2015) 371 ITR 139 (Del.) (iv) CIT v. Nipso Poly Fabriks Ltd. authority for?

Employee contributions to Provident Fund (PF) and Employees' State Insurance (ESI) are allowable as deductions if paid before the due date for filing the income tax return.

14

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT vs. Nipso Poly Fabriks Ltd. · employee PF contribution · employee ESI contribution · deduction before due date · income tax return filing · Section 43B · allowable expenses · tax deduction · assessment year

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 133A of the Income Tax ActSection 142(1) of the Income Tax ActSection 143(2) of the Income Tax ActSection 143(3) of the Income Tax ActSection 145(3) of the Income Tax ActSection 1962Section 1963

Judgments citing 242 (Kar.) (iii) Yum Restaurant India P. Ltd., (2015) 371 ITR 139 (Del.) (iv) CIT v. Nipso Poly Fabriks Ltd.

Calories Count, Jalandhar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1, Jalandhar

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as indicated

ITA 43/ASR/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar08 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Y. K. Sud, C.A
Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 250Section 270ASection 44A

…. Girish M. Mehta [2007] 105 TTD 585 (Rajkot) 18 I.T.A. No. 43/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2019-20 4. Pooranchand Agarwal v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax ITAT, Raipur Bench [2022] 216 TTJ (Raipur) 507 5. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Nuchem Ltd. [2015] 371 ITR 164 (P&H).” 22. Relying on the above judicial pronouncements, the Ld AR prayed for deletion of the addition and for acceptance of the returned income on the ground that no defects has been pointed out in the books produced and assessment based simply on the basis of statement or declaration during survey has little value and the AO has not specific…

Maahir Spices Private Limited, Chandigarh vs. Assessing Officer, Ward 1(1), Nangal

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 94/CHANDI/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh13 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr.DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36Section 43B

…he contention of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that the issue already stood decided in its favour by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s Lakhani Rubber Udyog (P) Ltd ITA No.215 of 2010 dt 22.09.2015 & CIT vs Nuchem Ltd (2015) 371 ITR 164(P&H), was brushed aside and the addition upheld. 4. This issue has been dealt with and adjudicated by the ITAT in a number of cases, consistently ruling in favour of the assessee, holding that the amendment to section 43B of the Act by insertion of Explanation-5 and to section 36(l)(va) of the Act by insertion of Explanation-2,by the Finance Ac…

Dove Chemicals Limited, Chandigarh vs. DCIT, Circle 1(1), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 93/CHANDI/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh12 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg

For Appellant: Shri B.K. Nohria, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Priyanka Dhar, Sr.DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36Section 43B

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, “SMC” CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.92/CHD/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20 Classic Bathroom Products P.Ltd. Vs The ITO, Plot No. 182/59, Industrial Area, Ward 5(1), Phase-1, Chandigarh. Aaykar Bhawan, Sector 17, Chandigarh . "थायीलेखासं./PAN NO: AABCC5769L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.93/CHD/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20 Dove Chemicals Ltd., Vs The DCIT, SCO 144, Sector 28-D, Circle 1(1), Chandigarh. Aaykar Bhawan, S…

Classic Bathroom Products Private Limited, Chandigarh vs. ITO Ward 5(1), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 92/CHANDI/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh12 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg

For Appellant: Shri B.K. Nohria, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Priyanka Dhar, Sr.DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36Section 43B

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, “SMC” CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.92/CHD/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20 Classic Bathroom Products P.Ltd. Vs The ITO, Plot No. 182/59, Industrial Area, Ward 5(1), Phase-1, Chandigarh. Aaykar Bhawan, Sector 17, Chandigarh . "थायीलेखासं./PAN NO: AABCC5769L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.93/CHD/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20 Dove Chemicals Ltd., Vs The DCIT, SCO 144, Sector 28-D, Circle 1(1), Chandigarh. Aaykar Bhawan, S…

Smt. Ashmi Gupta, Ludhiana vs. ITO, Ward VI(1), Ludhiana

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 23/CHANDI/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg

For Appellant: Ms. Vidisha Vinay, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Priyanka Dhar, Sr.DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36Section 43B

…he contention of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that the issue already stood decided in its favour by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s Lakhani Rubber Udyog (P) Ltd ITA No.215 of 2010 dt 22.09.2015 & CIT vs Nuchem Ltd (2015) 371 ITR 164(P&H), was brushed aside and the addition upheld. 7. This issue has been dealt with and adjudicated by the ITAT in a number of cases, consistently ruling in favour of the assessee, holding that the amendment to section 43B of the Act by insertion of Explanation-5 and to section 36(l)(va) of the Act by insertion of Explanation-2,by the Finance Ac…

M/S Chill Point Engineers (P) Limited, Chandigarh vs. DCIT, CPC/ITO-Ward-3(4), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 282/CHANDI/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh02 Dec 2021AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Priyanka Dhar, Sr.DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36Section 43B

…the contention of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that the issue already stood decided in its favour by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s Lakhani Rubber Udyog (P) Ltd ITA No.215 of 2010 dt 22.09.2015 & CIT vs Nuchem Ltd (2015) 371 ITR 164(P&H), was brushed aside and the addition upheld. 4. This issue has been dealt with and adjudicated by the ITAT in a number of cases, consistently ruling in favour of the assessee, holding that the amendment to section 43B of the Act by insertion of Explanation-5 and to section 36(l)(va) of the Act by insertion of Explanation-2,by the Finance A…

The Sirsa Co-Operative Marketing Cum Processing Lc Society, Sirsa vs. DCIT, CPC/ITO-Ward-3, Sirsa

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 274/CHANDI/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh02 Dec 2021AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Khanna, Addl.CIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36Section 43B

…the contention of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that the issue already stood decided in its favour by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s Lakhani Rubber Udyog (P) Ltd ITA No.215 of 2010 dt 22.09.2015 & CIT vs Nuchem Ltd (2015) 371 ITR 164(P&H), was brushed aside and the addition upheld. 4. This issue has been dealt with and adjudicated by the ITAT in a number of cases, consistently ruling in favour of the assessee, holding that the amendment to section 43B of the Act by insertion of Explanation-5 and to section 36(l)(va) of the Act by insertion of Explanation-2,by the Finance A…

M/Sohan Bakery, Ambala City vs. DCIT, CPC/ITO-Ward-1, Ambala

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 273/CHANDI/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh02 Dec 2021AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Khanna, Addl.CIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36Section 43B

…the contention of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that the issue already stood decided in its favour by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s Lakhani Rubber Udyog (P) Ltd ITA No.215 of 2010 dt 22.09.2015 & CIT vs Nuchem Ltd (2015) 371 ITR 164(P&H), was brushed aside and the addition upheld. 4. This issue has been dealt with and adjudicated by the ITAT in a number of cases, consistently ruling in favour of the assessee, holding that the amendment to section 43B of the Act by insertion of Explanation-5 and to section 36(l)(va) of the Act by insertion of Explanation-2,by the Finance A…

Millennium Outsourcing and Manpower Consulting Private Limited, Panchkula vs. ITO-Ward-5(5), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 270/CHANDI/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Dec 2021AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri Ajay Jain,CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Khanna, Addl.CIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36Section 43B

…the contention of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that the issue already stood decided in its favour by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s Lakhani Rubber Udyog (P) Ltd ITA No.215 of 2010 dt 22.09.2015 & CIT vs Nuchem Ltd (2015) 371 ITR 164(P&H), was brushed aside and the addition upheld. 4. This issue has been dealt with and adjudicated by the ITAT in a number of cases, consistently ruling in favour of the assessee, holding that the amendment to section 43B of the Act by insertion of Explanation-5 and to section 36(l)(va) of the Act by insertion of Explanation-2,by the Finance A…

Millennium Outsourcing and Manpower Consulting Private Limited, Panchkula vs. ITO-Ward-5(5), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 269/CHANDI/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Dec 2021AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Ajay Jain,CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Khanna, Addl.CIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36Section 43B

…the contention of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that the issue already stood decided in its favour by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s Lakhani Rubber Udyog (P) Ltd ITA No.215 of 2010 dt 22.09.2015 & CIT vs Nuchem Ltd (2015) 371 ITR 164(P&H), was brushed aside and the addition upheld. 4. This issue has been dealt with and adjudicated by the ITAT in a number of cases, consistently ruling in favour of the assessee, holding that the amendment to section 43B of the Act by insertion of Explanation-5 and to section 36(l)(va) of the Act by insertion of Explanation-2,by the Finance A…

Inder Singh, Jind vs. DCIT/ITO Ward-2, Jind

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 268/CHANDI/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Dec 2021AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Kumar Singla, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Priyanka Dhar, JCIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36Section 43B

…e contention of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that the issue already stood decided in its favour by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s Lakhani Rubber Udyog (P) Ltd ITA No.215 of 2010 dt 22.09.2015 & CIT vs Nuchem Ltd (2015) 371 ITR 164(P&H), was brushed aside and the addition upheld. 4. This issue has been dealt with and adjudicated by the ITAT in a number of cases, consistently ruling in favour of the assessee, holding that the amendment to section 43B of the Act by insertion of Explanation-5 and to section 36(l)(va) of the Act by insertion of Explanation-2,by the Finance Act…

Madan Dyeing & Finishing Factory, Ludhiana vs. Io-Range-VI(4), Ludhiana

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 265/CHANDI/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Nov 2021AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Navneet Sehgal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Priyanka Dhar, JCIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36Section 43B

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ “एकल” च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “SMC” CHANDIGARH "ी संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य BEFORE: SH. SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.265/CHD/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Madan Dyeing & Finishing Factory, The ITO, बनाम J-1, Textile Colony, Range VI(4), Industrial Area-A, Ludhiana. Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AADFM6770A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Navneet Sehgal, CA राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Priyanka Dhar, JCIT सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 30.11.2021 उदघोषणा क" त…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Gvk Technical & Consultancy Private Limited, Secunderabad

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1378/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Jan 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri V. Siva KumarFor Respondent: Smt. Komali Krishna
Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 438Section 43B

…ri Enterprises (2007) 298 ITR 141 (Kar.). (ii) Magus Customers Dialog P. Ltd., (2015) 371 ITR 242 (Kar.) (iii) Yum Restaurant India P. Ltd., (2015) 371 ITR 139 (Del.) (iv) CIT vs. Nipso Poly Fabriks Ltd., (2013)350 ITR 327 (HP) (v) CIT vs. Nuchem Ltd., (2015) 371 ITR 164(P&H). 4.1. We find that the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of VBC Industries Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-3(3), Hyderabad in ITA.Nos.143 & 144/H/2013 etc., dated 08.05.2015 and also in the case of M/s. Veljan Denison Limited, Hyderabad vs. Addl. CIT, Range-3, Hyderabad in ITA. No. 1251/Hyd/2015 dated 16.12.2015, has followe…

Swapna Health Care., Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6(1)., Hyderabad

In the result, the assessee appeal is allowed

ITA 1297/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Jan 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiahassessment Year: 2013-14 Swapna Health Care, Vs. Acit, Circle-6(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan- Aacfs9098Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri V. Sivakumar Revenue By : Shri K. Gopala Krishna Date Of Hearing : 19-01-2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 24-01-2018 Order Per P. Madhavi Devi, J.M.: This Is Assessee’S Appeal For The A.Y 2013-14, The Assessee Is Aggrieved By The Order Of The Cit(A)-6, Hyderabad, Dated 26-04-2017 In Confirming The Disallowance Of Rs. 1,84,406/- Towards Delayed Payment Of Employees Contributions Of Pf & Esi To The Government Account, Beyond The Due Dates Under The Respective Acts.

For Appellant: Shri V. SivakumarFor Respondent: Shri K. Gopala Krishna
Section 143(3)Section 43B

…Kar.). 5 Swapna Health Care, Hyderabad. (ii) Magus Customers Dialog P. Ltd., (2015) 371 ITR 242 (Kar.) (iii) Yum Restaurant India P. Ltd., (2015) 371 ITR 139 (Del.) (iv) CIT vs. Nipso Poly Fabriks Ltd., (2013) 350 ITR 327 (HP) (v) CIT vs. Nuchem Ltd., (2015) 371 ITR 164 (P&H). 4.1. We find that the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of VBC Industries Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-3(3), Hyderabad in ITA.Nos.143 & 144/H/2013 etc., dated 08.05.2015 and also in the case of M/s. Veljan Denison Limited, Hyderabad vs. Addl. CIT, Range-3, Hyderabad in ITA.No.1251/Hyd/2015 dated 16.12.2015, has followed…