279 ITR 331/149 Taxman 15 (Guj.); 5. CIT v. Sabari Enterprises

298 ITR 141High Court2008#74 most cited

What is 279 ITR 331/149 Taxman 15 (Guj.); 5. CIT v. Sabari Enterprises authority for?

Employee contributions to provident fund or ESI, even if deposited after the due date specified in the respective welfare statutes, are allowable as a deduction under Section 36(1)(va) if paid before the due date for filing the income-tax return. This judgment aligns the treatment of employee contributions with employer contributions under Section 43B.

706

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 382,409 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Sabari Enterprises · 298 ITR 141 · Karnataka High Court · Section 36(1)(va) · Section 43B · employee contribution · provident fund · ESI · payment before return filing · disallowance · due date for deposit · employer contribution · Alom Extrusions

Sections most often in play

Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 143(1)(a)Section 37(1)Section 143(3)Section 234B

Issues it is cited on

section 43(b)section 36(va)undisclosed foreign income and assetssection 43b(b)section 34(1)(iv)section 3(b)section 149(1)(c)section 4(2)actual payment basissection 34(1)section 201(3)section 36(1)(iv)

Judgments citing 279 ITR 331/149 Taxman 15 (Guj.); 5. CIT v. Sabari Enterprises

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Coffee Day Global Limited, Bangalore

In the result, both appeals of the revenue are partly allowed

ITA 815/BANG/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Sept 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shree C. Ramesh, C. AFor Respondent: Shree T Roumuan Paite, CIT DR
Section 36

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI A. K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(TP)A No. 815 & 816/Bang/2017 Assessment years : 2011 – 12 & 2012 – 13 DCIT Circle – 2 (1) (1), M/s Coffee Day Global Limited, Bengaluru No. 32/2, Coffee Day Square, Vs. Vittal Malya Road, Opp. U B City Building, Bengaluru – 560001 PAN : AABCA5291P APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shree C. Ramesh, C. A. Revenue by : Shree T Roumuan Paite, CIT DR Date of hearing : 02.09.2020 Date of Pronouncement : 30.09.2020 O R D E R PER ARUN KUMAR GARODIA, A. M.: Both these appeal…

M/S Enstage Software Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-2(1)(4), Bangalore

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed as indicated hereinabove

ITA 583/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Sept 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A.K Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Jain, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 234CSection 92C(2)

…9.3 We have perused submissions advanced by both sides in light of records placed before us. In our opinion this issue now stands settled in favour of assessee by decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in case of CIT vs Sabari Enterprises reported in (2008) 298 ITR 141, wherein Hon’ble Court held that, in view of statutory provisions of section 2(24)(x), section 36(1)(va) and section 43B(b), contributions made by assessee to PF and ESI are allowable deductions, even though made beyond stipulated period, as contemplated under mandatory provisions of section 36(1)(va), read with section 2(24)(x), provided such co…

Drs Dilip Roadlines Pvt.Ltd., Hyd, Secunderabad vs. ITO, Ward-17(1), Hyd, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1212/HYD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Sept 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2013-14 (Through Video Conference) Drs Dilip Roadlines Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Hyderabad. Ward – 17(1), Hyderabad. Pan – Aadcd 1865 C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri M.V. Anil KumarFor Respondent: Shri Arvindakshan RS

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH “B”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2013-14 (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE) DRS Dilip Roadlines Pvt. Ltd., vs. Income-tax Officer, Hyderabad. Ward – 17(1), Hyderabad. PAN – AADCD 1865 C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri M.V. Anil Kumar Revenue by : Shri Arvindakshan RS Date of hearing : 02/09/2020 Date of pronouncement : 04/09/2020 O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH, A.M.: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of CIT(A) – 5, dated 29/07/2016, Hyderabad fo…

M/S Dreamax Infra Developers Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 160/JPR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Aug 2020AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.C. Gupta, JCIT
Section 139(1)Section 145(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

…014) 366 ITR 163 (Raj) (ii) CIT Vs State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur [2014] 363 ITR 70 (Rajasthan) (iii) Commissioner of Income-tax v. Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited [2014] 49 taxmann.com 540 (Rajasthan) (iv) Allied Motors Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 224 ITR 677 (SC); 298 ITR 141 (Kar) (v) 2015 (1) TMI 974 – Gujarat high court in the case of CIT V/s Noble Detective & Security Services Pvt. Ltd Appeal No. 251 of 2007 and (vi) CIT v/s Aimil Ltd & Ors (2010) 229 CTR (Del) 418. (vii) The Hon’ble ITAT Jaipur Bench in the case of ACIT Circle-6, Jaipur Vs Kanhaiya Lal Kalyanmal ITA No 135,760 & 136/JP/2013 vide order dated 26/01…

24/7 Customer Private Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, appeal filed by assessee stands dismissed as withdrawn in respect of transfer pricing issues

ITA 689/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri. A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A 689/Bang/2016 Assessment Year : 2011 – 12 M/S. 24/7 Customer Pvt. Ltd., Deputy Commissioner Of Income Prestige Tech Platina – 2, Tax, Survey Nos. 32/1, 32/2, 34/1, Ward 2 (1) (1), 34/2, 34/3, 34/4, Room No. 217, 2Nd Floor, Kadubeesanahalli Village, Bmtc Building, Varthur Hobli, Outer Ring Vs. Koramangala, Road Between Sarjapur & Bangalore – 560 047. Marathahalli, Bangalore – 560 087. Pan No : Aaacz1014A Appellant Respondent & It(Tp)A 591/Bang/2016 Assessment Year : 2011 – 12

For Appellant: Shri. Sumit LovaniwalaFor Respondent: Mr. Muzaffar Hussain, CIT - DR
Section 10Section 2Section 36

…mployee contribution is remitted before the specified due date for filing of return under section 139 (1), the same is an allowable expenditure. He placed reliance upon decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in case of CIT vs Sarabai Enterprises reported in 298 ITR 141 and Spectrum Consultants India Pvt Ltd., reported in (2013) 34 Taxmann.com 20. 10. We have perused submissions advanced by both sides in light of records placed before us. Ld. AR has submitted that both sections 36 (1) (va) and section 43B allows such payment to be considered as expenses, if they are made before the due date for filing return of…

Parikh Packaging Pvt Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. ITO, Ward-3(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee dismissed

ITA 2778/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Wassem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2778/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Parikh Packaging Pvt. Ltd. Ito बनाम/ Opp. Rotomac Pens, Sarkhej Wd-3(1)(2) Vs. 4Th Floor, B-402, Pratyaksh Bawla Highway, Village Moraiya, Tal Sanand, Kar Bhavan, Ambawadi, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad- 380015 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aab Cp7 894 F .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri Mehul Talera, Ar Shri L. P. Jain, Sr. Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of 25/10/2019 Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of 18/11/2019 Pronouncement आदेश/O R D E R Per Mahavir Prasad - Jm: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)-9/10555/Ito Wd-3(1)(2)/16-17 Dated 11.09.2017 Arising Out Of Assessment Order Dated 29.02.2016 & Assessee Has Taken Following Grounds:

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Talera, AR
Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…in as to why the same may not be disallowed and added back to the total income u/s. 36(1)(va) r.w.s 2(24)(x) of the I.T. Act. The assessee vide letter dated stated that the same is allowable as per high court decision in the case of CIT vs. Sabari Enterprise, 298 ITR 141. However, the said judgment is in respect of employer’s contribution and not for employee contribution and Ld. AO made an addition of Rs. 35,93,362/- as assessee failed to deposit employees’ contribution to PF and ESI within due date as specified in explanation to Sec. 36(1)(va). Against the order of AO assessee preferred first statutory appeal b…

M/S. Axis Motors Private Limited, Kanpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-6, Kanpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 289/LKW/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow31 Jul 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 139(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 44A

…, (2014) 366 ITR 167, Himachal Pradesh High Court in Commissioner of I.T.A. No.289/Lkw/2019 Assessment Year:2014-15 5 Income­Tax Vs Nipso Ployfabriks Ltd., (2013) 350 ITR 327 and Karnataka High Court in Commissioner of Income­Tax Vs Sabri Enterprises, (2008) 298 ITR 141. 2.1 Karnataka High Court had an occasion to consider, whether it should dissent with the view taken in the earlier judgments and follow the view taken by Gujrat High Court in Commissioner of Income­Tax Vs Gujrat State Road Transport Corporation (supra) and this occasion came in Essae Teraoka P. Ltd. Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income­Tax, (2014) 3…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-5(1)(2), Bangalore vs. M/S Private Eye Pvt Ltd, Bangalore

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2014-15 is dismissed

ITA 470/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boazassessment Year : 2014-15 Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Private Eye Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, No.30/9, 80 Feet Road, Circle – 5(1)(2), 2Nd Floor, Indiranagar, Bmtc Building, Koramangala, Bangalore – 560 038. 80 Feet Road, Pan : Aaccp 3314 K Bangalore – 560 095. Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri. Vikas Suryavamshi, Addl. Cit Assessee By : Shri. B. Sudheendra, Advocate Date Of Hearing : 10.07.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.07.2019 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. B. Sudheendra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Vikas Suryavamshi, Addl. CIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

…er in appeal before us. After having heard the rival contentions in the matter and considering the judicial precedents in the matter, we find that this issue has been decided by the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sabari Enterprises (2008) 298 ITR 141 (Kar), which has been followed by the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Spectrum Consultants India Pvt. Ltd., in WA No.4077/2013 (T-IT) dated 09.12.2013. In the aforesaid decisions (supra), the Hon’ble Court has held that the employer shall get deduction for payment of employees’ contributions to PF provided they are deposited b…

Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(1)(3), Bangalore vs. M/S. Atc Beverages Private Limited, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is treated as partly allowed

ITA 891/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri R.N Siddappaji, Addl. CIT (DR)For Respondent: Shri V Sridhar, C.A
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 79

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B’’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI B.R BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment year : 2014-15 The Income-tax Officer, Vs. M/s ATC Beverages Pvt. Ltd., No.202, Money Centre, 4th Floor, Ward-1(1)(3), Bengaluru. 121, Koramangala Industrial Area, Hosur Road, Bengaluru. PAN – AAECA 7901 R. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri R.N Siddappaji, Addl. CIT (DR) Respondent by : Shri V Sridhar, C.A Date of hearing : 23.07.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 23.07.2019 O R D E R Per B.R Baskaran, Accountant Member The revenue has filed this appeal ch…

M/S Yaskawa India Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2012-13 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2020/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanand Shri Jason P Boazit(Tp)A No.2020/Bang/2017 Assessment Years : 2012-13 M/S. Yaskawa India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of No.17/A, 2Nd Main, Electronic Income-Tax, City, Phase – I, Hosur Road, Circle – 7(1)(2), Bengaluru – 560 100. Bengaluru. Pan : Aaacy 4408 P Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Narendra Jain, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. C. H. Sundar Rao, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 09.07.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.07.2019 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. Narendra Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. C. H. Sundar Rao, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144(13)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

…is regard, which was brushed aside on technical grounds and IT(TP)A No.2020/Bang/2017 Page 6 of 7 not on merits. It is contended that the deduction is to be allowed in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Sabari Enterprises (298 ITR 141) (Kar). 5.2.1 We have heard the rival contentions in the matter and perused the material on record. In the facts of the case on hand, admittedly the assessee claims that it had inadvertently disallowed employees’ contribution to PF amounting to Rs.22,49,827/- in the revised return filed by it for Assessment Year 2012-13. We find that this issue…

Sanghvi Diamond Mfg. Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(2), Surat

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is set aside for statistical purpose

ITA 168/SRT/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat16 Jul 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Meenaassessment Year: 2013-14 M/S.Sanghvi Diamonds Mfg. Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 103 To 113, Sanghvi Building, Op. Ward-2(1)(2), Surat. Prannat Hospital, Ved Road, Surat. [Pan: Aadcs 4321 C] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S.Sanghvi Diamonds Mfg. Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 103 To 113, Sanghvi Building, Op. Ward-2(1)(2), Surat. Prannat Hospital, Ved Road, Surat. [Pan: Aadcs 4321 C] (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 014Section 139Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…led for deduction. In support her contentions, she cited decisions of Hon'ble High Courts as under: “Karnataka High Court: February 4, 2014 [2014] 366 ITR 408 (Kar) M/s. Essae Teraoka Pvt ltd Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax Karnataka High Court: [2008] 298 ITR 141 (Karn) : July 3, 2007 CIT vs. Sabari Enterprises Rajasthan High Court : [2014] 363 ITR 307 :January 6, 2014 CIT, Jaipur-II, Vs. Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd and Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nighm Ltd. Rajasthan High Court :[2014] 366 ITR 163 : May 13, 2013 CIT, Udaipur Vs. M/s.Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sangh Limited, Udaipur Raja…

Tecnotree Convergence Lt D, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12 is dismissed

ITA 1520/BANG/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boaz

For Respondent: Shri. Pradeep Kumar, CIT
Section 10ASection 10A(3)Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 155Section 40Section 94(7)

…er in appeal before us. After having heard the rival contentions in the matter and considering the judicial precedents in the matter, we find that this issue has been decided by the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sabari Enterprises (2008) 298 ITR 141 (Kar), which has been followed by the ITA Nos. 1447 and 1448/Bang/2017 ITA Nos. 1519 and 1520/Bang/2017 Page 42 of 45 Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Spectrum Consultants India Pvt. Ltd., in WA No.4077/2013 (T-IT) dated 09.12.2013. In the aforesaid decisions (supra), the Hon’ble Court has held that the employer shall get deduc…

Tecnotree Convergence Lt D, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12 is dismissed

ITA 1519/BANG/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boaz

For Respondent: Shri. Pradeep Kumar, CIT
Section 10ASection 10A(3)Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 155Section 40Section 94(7)

…er in appeal before us. After having heard the rival contentions in the matter and considering the judicial precedents in the matter, we find that this issue has been decided by the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sabari Enterprises (2008) 298 ITR 141 (Kar), which has been followed by the ITA Nos. 1447 and 1448/Bang/2017 ITA Nos. 1519 and 1520/Bang/2017 Page 42 of 45 Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Spectrum Consultants India Pvt. Ltd., in WA No.4077/2013 (T-IT) dated 09.12.2013. In the aforesaid decisions (supra), the Hon’ble Court has held that the employer shall get deduc…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Tecnotree Convergence Ltd, Gurgaon

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12 is dismissed

ITA 1448/BANG/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boaz

For Respondent: Shri. Pradeep Kumar, CIT
Section 10ASection 10A(3)Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 155Section 40Section 94(7)

…er in appeal before us. After having heard the rival contentions in the matter and considering the judicial precedents in the matter, we find that this issue has been decided by the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sabari Enterprises (2008) 298 ITR 141 (Kar), which has been followed by the ITA Nos. 1447 and 1448/Bang/2017 ITA Nos. 1519 and 1520/Bang/2017 Page 42 of 45 Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Spectrum Consultants India Pvt. Ltd., in WA No.4077/2013 (T-IT) dated 09.12.2013. In the aforesaid decisions (supra), the Hon’ble Court has held that the employer shall get deduc…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Tecnotree Convergence Ltd, Gurgaon

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12 is dismissed

ITA 1447/BANG/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boaz

For Respondent: Shri. Pradeep Kumar, CIT
Section 10ASection 10A(3)Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 155Section 40Section 94(7)

…er in appeal before us. After having heard the rival contentions in the matter and considering the judicial precedents in the matter, we find that this issue has been decided by the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sabari Enterprises (2008) 298 ITR 141 (Kar), which has been followed by the ITA Nos. 1447 and 1448/Bang/2017 ITA Nos. 1519 and 1520/Bang/2017 Page 42 of 45 Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Spectrum Consultants India Pvt. Ltd., in WA No.4077/2013 (T-IT) dated 09.12.2013. In the aforesaid decisions (supra), the Hon’ble Court has held that the employer shall get deduc…

Frigorifico Allana Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 1(1)(4), Mumbai

ITA 925/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri N. K. Pradhan, Am

For Appellant: Shri Apurva R. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Gubgotra, DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(24)(x)

…was deposited beyond the due date. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court further analysed other earlier judicialpronouncements on the very same issue of the cases, CIT v. Alembic Glass Industries Ltd. [2005] 279 ITR 331 (Gujarat-HC), CIT v. Sabari Enterprises [2008] 298 ITR 141 (Karnataka-HC) and CIT v. Pamwi Tissues Ltd. [2009] 313 ITR 137 (Bombay-HC) 5 CIT v. Nipso Polyfabriks Ltd. [2013] 350 ITR 327 (Himachal Pradesh-HC), Spectrum Consultants India (P) Ltd. v. CIT [2013] 34 taxmann.com 20 (Karnataka-HC), CIT v. Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sandh Ltd. [2013] 35 taxmann.com 616 (Rajasthan-HC) and CIT v. Hemla Embroid…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-5(1)(2), Bangalore vs. M/S Page Industries Limited, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1209/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Jun 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Dr. Shankar Prasad, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), BengaluruFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Lunkar, CA
Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 43BSection 80J

…that if the employees contribution to PF & ESI is paid on or before due date u/s. 139(1) of the Act, then there can be no disallowance u/s. 43B of the Act and it was so held by the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of CIT v. Sabari Industries [2008] 298 ITR 141 (Kar). 3. The ld. DR, however, placed reliance on a contrary decision rendered by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation, 366 ITR 170 (Guj). 4. The decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka which is the jurisdictional High Court is to be followed by the Tribunal. Consequently, we find…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-5(1)(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Network Detective Agency Pvt Ltd, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2044/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Feb 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri. A. K. Garodia & Shri. Laliet Kumari.T.A No.2044/Bang/2018 (Assessment Year : 2014-15) Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle -5(1)(1), Bengaluru .. Appellant V. M/S. Network Detective Agency P. Ltd. No.69/1, Kuvempu Nagar, 35Th Main, 7Th Cross, Btm Layout, 2Nd Stage, Bengaluru 560058 .. Respondent Pan : Aaccn3772D Assessee By : Shri. S. Srinivasan, Ca Revenue By : Shri. R. N. Siddappaji, Addl. Cit Heard On : 28.02.2019 Pronounced On : 28.02.2019 O R D E R Per Laliet Kumar:

For Appellant: Shri. S. Srinivasan, CAFor Respondent: Shri. R. N. Siddappaji, Addl. CIT
Section 139(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…deposited within the FY 2013-14 or much before the due date for filing the return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act. ITA.2044/Bang/2018 Page - 6 5.3 The issue has been dealt with by the jurisdictional High‘court in the cases of CIT vs Sabari Enterprises 2008 298 ITR 141 KAR, dt 3 July, 2007 and M/S. EssaeTeraoka Pvt. Ltd vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Income- tax ITA.NO.480/2013 dt4 February, 2014, and the same was decided against the revenue. Further on similar issue the SLP of the department was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Jaipur. v. Rajasthan Stat…

ACIT, CC-3(2), Kolkata vs. M/S. Snowtex Investment Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1799/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Feb 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, J.M. & Dr.A.L.Saini, A.M.) Asstt. Year : 2012-13 A.C.I.T, Cc-3(2), Kolkata Vs M/S. Snowtex Investment Ltd. Pan: Aaecs 0334C (Assessee/Department) (Respondent/Assessee)

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Sr. Advocate, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Radhey Shyam, CIT, ld.DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…[ 139 TTJ 192 (Kol)] ( which in turn relied on ITC Ltd [ 112 ITD 57 (Kol)(SB) where it was held that s. 43B does not apply to employee’s contribution). However, the Tribunal declined to follow that law and allowed the appeal by relying on Sabari Enterprises [298 ITR 141 (Kar) and P.M. Electronics Ltd [ 220 CTR 635 (Del) where it was held that s. 43B applied also to employees’ contribution to ESI and PF and that if a payment was made within the due date u/s. 139(1) of filing the ROI, the disallowance cannot be made. On appeal by the department to the High Court, HELD dismissing the appeal: "The only issue involve…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-5(1)(2), Bangalore vs. M/S Prateek Apparels Pvt Ltd, Bangalore

In the result, the revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1208/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Feb 2019AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Smarak Swain, JCIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri H.N.Khincha, CA
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…t which is not disputed by the revenue and also supported his arguments with following judicial decisions: i. CIT vs. Spectrum Consultants India (P) Ltd. (49 taxmann.com 29 ii. CIT vs. Alom Extrusions Ltd. (185 Taxman 416)(SC) iii. CIT vs. Sabari Enterprises (298 ITR 141)(Kar) iv. BPL Ltd. vs. ACIT (ITA No.1055/Bang/2017 dt.3/11/2017) v. M/s.UB Infrastructure Projects Ltd. vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (ITA No.2098/Bang/2016 dt.22/12/2017) Page 5 of 6 We find the decision of the jurisdiction High Court In the case of Sabari Enterprises (supra) is applicable to this case and which reads as under: “Section…