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

Bhim Singh, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Gurgon

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2978/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Hon’Ble Vice-A N D Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

For Appellant: Shri Anuj Tiwari
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ncerned fund (EPF, ESI, etc.) and avoid the mischief of employers retaining amounts for long periods. 24 Commissioner of Income-Tax Vs. Aimil Ltd., [2010] 321 ITR 508 (Delhi High Court). 25 Commissioner of Income-Tax and another Vs. Sabari Enterprises, [2008] 298 ITR 141 (Karnataka High Court). 26 Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Pamwi Tissues Ltd., [2009] 313 ITR 137 (Bombay High Court). 27 Commissioner of Income-Tax, Udaipur v. Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sandh Ltd., [2013] 35 taxmann.com 616 (Rajasthan High Court). That Parliament intended to retain the separate character of these two amounts, is evident from…

M/S Ashok Engineering Works, Korba vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 54/RPR/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur24 Nov 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 53 & 54/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2017-18 & 2018-19 M/S. Ashoka Engineering Works, Lig-51, Sada Colony, Jamnipali, Korba (C.G.)-495 450 Pan : Aaafw5581G .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Y.K Mishra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 36(1)(va)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण "यायपीठ रायपुर म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos. 53 & 54/RPR/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2017-18 & 2018-19 M/s. Ashoka Engineering Works, LIG-51, Sada Colony, Jamnipali, Korba (C.G.)-495 450 PAN : AAAFW5581G .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/s. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Y.K Mishra, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hea…

M/S Ashoka Engineering Works, Korba vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 53/RPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur24 Nov 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 53 & 54/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2017-18 & 2018-19 M/S. Ashoka Engineering Works, Lig-51, Sada Colony, Jamnipali, Korba (C.G.)-495 450 Pan : Aaafw5581G .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Y.K Mishra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 36(1)(va)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण "यायपीठ रायपुर म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos. 53 & 54/RPR/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2017-18 & 2018-19 M/s. Ashoka Engineering Works, LIG-51, Sada Colony, Jamnipali, Korba (C.G.)-495 450 PAN : AAAFW5581G .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/s. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Y.K Mishra, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hea…

Pradeep Kumar Dhurve, Durg vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle 1(1), Bhilai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 302/RPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur23 Nov 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 302/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Pradeep Kumar Dhurve Near Pawan Kirana Store, Sangram Chowk, Prem Nagar, Sikola Bhata, Durg (C.G.)-491 001 Pan : Aanpd6067H

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…are cited below: ………... ……….. 6 Pradeep Kumar Dhurve Vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Bhilai “51. The analysis of the various judgments cited on behalf of the assessee i.e., CIT v. Aimil LTD. [2010] 188 Taxman 265/321 ITR 508 (Delhi); CIT v. Sabari Enterprises [2008] 298 ITR 141 (Kar.); CIT v. Pamwi Tissues Ltd [2009] 313 ITR 137 {BOM.}; CIT v. Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sangh Ltd. [2013] 35 taxmann.com 616/217 taxman 64 (Mag.)[2014] 366 ITR 163 and Nipso Polyfabriks (supra) would reveal that in all these cases, the high courts principally relied upon omission of second proviso to Section 43B (b). No doubt many of th…

Shyam Sunder, Bhopal vs. The CIT(A) NFAC, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of assesse is dismissed

ITA 161/IND/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Indore16 Nov 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Raoshyam Sunder Trivedi Ito1(4) Opp.-1 Vashundra State Bank Bhopal Vs. Colony Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Revenue) Pan: Actpt 3280G Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 15.11.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 16.11.2023

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 254Section 254(2)Section 36(1)(va)Section 36(1)(via)Section 43B

…oncerned fund (EPF, ESI, etc.) and avoid the mischief of employers retaining amounts for long periods. That Commissioner of Income-Tax Vs. Aimil Ltd., [2010] 321 ITR 508 (Delhi High Court).Commissioner of Income- Tax and another Vs. Sabari Enterprises, [2008] 298 ITR 141 (Karnataka High Court).Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Pamwi Tissues Ltd., [2009] 313 ITR 137 (Bombay High Court).Commissioner of Income-Tax, Udaipur v. Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sandh Ltd., [2013] 35 taxmann.com 616 (Rajasthan High Court).Parliament intended to retain the separate character of these two amounts, is evident from the use of di…

M/S. Kamla Construction Co., Bhopal vs. Pr. CIT-2, Bhopal

In the result, ground no.1 of the assesse’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 16/IND/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore08 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S. Kamla Construction Co. Pr. Cit-2 Kcc Main Road Bhopal Vs. Obedullaganj Dist. Raisen (Appellant / Assessee) (Revenue) Pan: Aktpp8040L Assessee By Shri Sumit Kumar Khabya, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 27.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 08.11.2023

Section 139(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 263Section 34(1)(iv)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…n’ble Supreme Court has considered and decided this issue in para 51 to 55 as under: “51. The analysis of the various judgments cited on behalf of the assessee i.e.,CIT v. Aimil Ltd. [2010] 188 Taxman 265/321 ITR 508 (Delhi); CIT v. Sabari Enterprises [2008] 298 ITR 141 (Kar.); CIT v. Pamwi Tissues Ltd. [2009] 313 ITR 137 (Bom.); CIT v. Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sangh Ltd. [2013] 35 taxmann.com 616/217 Taxman 64 (Mag.)/[2014] 366 ITR 163 and Nipso Polyfabriks (supra) would reveal that in all these cases, the High Courts principally relied upon omission of second proviso to Section 43B (b). No doubt, many of…

Atc Logistical Solutions Private Limited, Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Amritsar

In the result, appeal of the assessee ITA No

ITA 241/ASR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 115JSection 139Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 40ASection 40A(7)

…ails to catch him on account of the legislature's failure to express itself clearly.'" 51. The analysis of the various judgments cited on behalf of the assessee i.e.,CIT v. Aimil Ltd. [2010] 188 Taxman 265/321 ITR 508 (Delhi); CIT v. Sabari Enterprises [2008] 298 ITR 141 (Kar.); CIT v. Pamwi Tissues Ltd. [2009] 313 ITR 137 (Bom.); CIT v. Udaipur DugdhUtpadakSahakari Sangh Ltd. [2013] 35 taxmann.com 616/217 Taxman 64 (Mag.)/[2014] 366 ITR 163 and NipsoPolyfabriks (supra) would reveal that in all these cases, the High Courts principally relied upon omission of second proviso to Section 43B (b). No I.T.A. No. 241/A…

M/S. Linklaters, Mumbai vs. The DDIT (It) 4(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3280/MUM/2008[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2023AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blelinklaters V. Ddit (International Taxation) – 4(1) Scindia House, N.M. Road C/O. Deloitte Haskins & Sells Llp Bellard Estate, Mumbai - 400001 Indiabulls Finance Centre Tower 3 28Th Floor, Senapati Bapat Marg Elphinstone Road (West) Mumbai - 400013 Pan: Aabfl2160M (Appellant) (Respondent) Ddit (International Taxation) – 4(1) V. Linklaters Scindia House, N.M. Road C/O. Deloitte Haskins & Sells Llp Bellard Estate, Mumbai - 400001 Indiabulls Finance Centre Tower 3 28Th Floor, Senapati Bapat Marg Elphinstone Road (West) Mumbai - 400013 Pan: Aabfl2160M (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 244ASection 44C

…of the assessee by a large number of decisions of the Tribunal, including Special Bench decision in the case of Motorola Inc Vs DCIT (95 ITD SB 269) which has since been approved by the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of DIT Vs NGC Network LLC (313 ITR 137). Learned Departmental Representative, nevertheless, dutifully relies upon the order of the Assessing Officer. 138. Respectfully following the esteemed views of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Curt in the case of NGC Network LLC (supra), we approve the conclusions arrived at by the CIT(A) and decline to interfere on the matter on this count as well.…

DDIT (It)-4(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Linklaters, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3039/MUM/2008[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2023AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blelinklaters V. Ddit (International Taxation) – 4(1) Scindia House, N.M. Road C/O. Deloitte Haskins & Sells Llp Bellard Estate, Mumbai - 400001 Indiabulls Finance Centre Tower 3 28Th Floor, Senapati Bapat Marg Elphinstone Road (West) Mumbai - 400013 Pan: Aabfl2160M (Appellant) (Respondent) Ddit (International Taxation) – 4(1) V. Linklaters Scindia House, N.M. Road C/O. Deloitte Haskins & Sells Llp Bellard Estate, Mumbai - 400001 Indiabulls Finance Centre Tower 3 28Th Floor, Senapati Bapat Marg Elphinstone Road (West) Mumbai - 400013 Pan: Aabfl2160M (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 244ASection 44C

…of the assessee by a large number of decisions of the Tribunal, including Special Bench decision in the case of Motorola Inc Vs DCIT (95 ITD SB 269) which has since been approved by the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of DIT Vs NGC Network LLC (313 ITR 137). Learned Departmental Representative, nevertheless, dutifully relies upon the order of the Assessing Officer. 138. Respectfully following the esteemed views of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Curt in the case of NGC Network LLC (supra), we approve the conclusions arrived at by the CIT(A) and decline to interfere on the matter on this count as well.…

Bhavna Enterprise, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(3)(3), Surat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 487/SRT/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. A. L. Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.487/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Virtual Hearing) Bhavna Enterprise, Vs. The Adit, 30, Ambika Nagar Society, Cpc, Bengaluru Hazira Road, Ichchhapore, Jurisdictional Assessing Officer: Surat - 394510 The Ito, Ward-2(3)(6), Surat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aagfb5274K (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 36

…ed fund (EPF, ESI, etc.) and avoid the mischief of employers retaining amounts for long periods. That 24 Commissioner of Income-Tax Vs. Aimil Ltd., [2010] 321 ITR 508 (Delhi High Court). 25 Commissioner of Income-Tax and another Vs. Sabari Enterprises, [2008] 298 ITR 141 (Karnataka High Court). 26 Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Pamwi Tissues Ltd., [2009] 313 ITR 137 (Bombay High Court). 27 Commissioner of Income-Tax, Udaipur v. Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sandh Ltd., [2013] 35 taxmann.com 616 (Rajasthan High Court). 32 Parliament intended to retain the separate character of these two amounts, is evident from t…

Makson Health Care P Ltd, Mandideep vs. The DCIT/Accit-1(1), Bhopal

In the result, both appeals filed by the assesse in ITANo

ITA 35/IND/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore26 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 36(1)(i)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.34 & 35/Ind/2023 (Assessment Year:2013-14 & 2014-15) Makson Health Care Pvt. Ltd. DCIT-10(2)(2) Plot No.6A AKVN Industrial Mumbai Vs. Arera Mandideep Raisen (Appellant / Assessee) (Revenue) PAN: AADCM 3354 P Assessee by Shri Sumit Nema, Sr. Adv. & Gagan Tiwari, Adv. Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 25.09.2023 Date of Pronouncement 25.09.2023 O R D E R PER VIJAY PAL RAO, JM: These two appeals by the Asse…

Makson Healh Care P Ltd, Mandideep vs. The DCIT/ACIT1(1), Bhopal

In the result, both appeals filed by the assesse in ITANo

ITA 34/IND/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore26 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 36(1)(i)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.34 & 35/Ind/2023 (Assessment Year:2013-14 & 2014-15) Makson Health Care Pvt. Ltd. DCIT-10(2)(2) Plot No.6A AKVN Industrial Mumbai Vs. Arera Mandideep Raisen (Appellant / Assessee) (Revenue) PAN: AADCM 3354 P Assessee by Shri Sumit Nema, Sr. Adv. & Gagan Tiwari, Adv. Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 25.09.2023 Date of Pronouncement 25.09.2023 O R D E R PER VIJAY PAL RAO, JM: These two appeals by the Asse…

The ACIT-1(1), Indore vs. M/S. Bridgestone India Pvt. Ltd., Pune

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 210/IND/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Sept 2023AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniacit-1(1) M/S. Bridgestone India Pvt. Ltd. Indore Plot No.A-43, Phase-Ii, Midc, Vs. Chakan, Pune, Maharastra (Appellant / Revenue) (Assessee) Pan: Aabcb2304E Revenue By Shri Ankit Guttani & Yash Daga, Ars Assessee By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 21.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 22.09.2023

Section 36(1)(va)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACIT-1(1) M/s. Bridgestone India Pvt. Ltd. Indore Plot No.A-43, Phase-II, MIDC, Vs. Chakan, Pune, Maharastra (Appellant / Revenue) (Assessee) PAN: AABCB2304E Revenue by Shri Ankit Guttani & Yash Daga, ARs Assessee by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 21.09.2023 Date of Pronouncement 22.09.2023 O R D E R Per Vijay Pal Rao, JM: This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 03.07.2022 of Commissioner of Incom…

M/S Tarun Construction Company, Ward No.24, Near Bhagat Singh Chowk, Suratgarh vs. CPC, Bangalore/ ITO, Ward-1, Sriganganagar

In the result, appeals are dismissed

ITA 109/JODH/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur21 Sept 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Dr. Brr Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. P.C. Parwal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Rajeev Mohan, JCIT-DR
Section 10ASection 139Section 142Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)

…award, contract of service or otherwise. The section nowhere provides that the due date means the date by which the amount is to be deposited under the relevant Statue. For this reason Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in case of CIT Vs. Sabari Enterprises (2008) 298 ITR 141 at para 12 & 13 of its order held as under:- “12. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we have carefully examined the above statutory provisions of the Act including the definition of sections 2(24)(x) and s. 36(1)(va) and 43B(b), which read thus : 2.(24) 'income' includes,— . . . (x) any sum received by the assessee from his employee…

M/S Tarun Construction Company, Ward No.24, Near Bhagat Singh Chowk, Suratgarh vs. CPC, Bangalore/ ITO, Ward-1, Sriganganagar

In the result, appeals are dismissed

ITA 108/JODH/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur21 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Dr. Brr Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. P.C. Parwal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Rajeev Mohan, JCIT-DR
Section 10ASection 139Section 142Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)

…award, contract of service or otherwise. The section nowhere provides that the due date means the date by which the amount is to be deposited under the relevant Statue. For this reason Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in case of CIT Vs. Sabari Enterprises (2008) 298 ITR 141 at para 12 & 13 of its order held as under:- “12. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we have carefully examined the above statutory provisions of the Act including the definition of sections 2(24)(x) and s. 36(1)(va) and 43B(b), which read thus : 2.(24) 'income' includes,— . . . (x) any sum received by the assessee from his employee…

On Door Concepts P Ltd, Bhopal vs. DCIT/ACIT 3(1), Bhopal

In the result, both appeals filed by the assesse in ITANo

ITA 13/IND/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore14 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 34(1)(iv)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…SC) wherein, it has been decided in favour of the revenue in Para 51 to 55 as under: “51. The analysis of the various judgments cited on behalf of the assessee i.e.,CIT v. Aimil Ltd. [2010] 188 Taxman 265/321 ITR 508 (Delhi); CIT v. Sabari Enterprises [2008] 298 ITR 141 (Kar.); CIT v. Pamwi Tissues Ltd. [2009] 313 ITR 137 (Bom.); CIT v. Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sangh Ltd. [2013] 35 taxmann.com 616/217 Taxman 64 (Mag.)/[2014] 366 ITR 163 and Nipso Polyfabriks (supra) would reveal that in all these cases, the High Courts principally relied upon omission of second proviso to Section 43B (b). No doubt, many of…

On Door Concepts P Ltd, Bhopal vs. DCIT/ACIT 3(1), Bhopal

In the result, both appeals filed by the assesse in ITANo

ITA 12/IND/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore14 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 34(1)(iv)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…SC) wherein, it has been decided in favour of the revenue in Para 51 to 55 as under: “51. The analysis of the various judgments cited on behalf of the assessee i.e.,CIT v. Aimil Ltd. [2010] 188 Taxman 265/321 ITR 508 (Delhi); CIT v. Sabari Enterprises [2008] 298 ITR 141 (Kar.); CIT v. Pamwi Tissues Ltd. [2009] 313 ITR 137 (Bom.); CIT v. Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sangh Ltd. [2013] 35 taxmann.com 616/217 Taxman 64 (Mag.)/[2014] 366 ITR 163 and Nipso Polyfabriks (supra) would reveal that in all these cases, the High Courts principally relied upon omission of second proviso to Section 43B (b). No doubt, many of…

Shri Kamlesh Sen, Bhopal vs. The CIT (A) NFAC, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 98/IND/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore05 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanishri Kamlesh Sen Nfac 55, Saluja Complex Delhi Vs. M.P. Nagar-1 Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Revenue) Pan: Bejps 5672C Assessee By Shri Ashish Goyal & Shri N.D. Patwa, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 04.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 05.09.2023

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 246ASection 250Section 34(1)(iv)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ein, this issue has been decided in favour of the revenue in Para 51 to 55 as under: “51. The analysis of the various judgments cited on behalf of the assessee i.e.,CIT v. Aimil Ltd. [2010] 188 Taxman 265/321 ITR 508 (Delhi); CIT v. Sabari Enterprises [2008] 298 ITR 141 (Kar.); CIT v. Pamwi Tissues Ltd. [2009] 313 ITR 137 (Bom.); CIT v. Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sangh Ltd. [2013] 35 taxmann.com 616/217 Taxman 64 (Mag.)/[2014] 366 ITR 163 and Nipso Polyfabriks (supra) Page 2 of 5 Shri Kamlesh Sen Page 3 of 5 would reveal that in all these cases, the High Courts principally relied upon omission of second prov…

Vishwaranjan Prasad Singh, Bhopal vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangaluru

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 24/IND/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Aug 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanivishwaranjan Prasad Singh Dcit-Cpc Prop World Wide Security Org, Bangalore Vs. H 203, Baghmugalia Extension Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Revenue) Pan: Acpps 7520Q Assessee By Shri S.S. Deshpandey, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 31.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 31.08.2023

Section 139Section 143Section 2(24)(x)Section 34(1)(iv)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ein, this issue has been decided in favour of the revenue in Para 51 to 55 as under: “51. The analysis of the various judgments cited on behalf of the assessee i.e.,CIT v. Aimil Ltd. [2010] 188 Taxman 265/321 ITR 508 (Delhi); CIT v. Sabari Enterprises [2008] 298 ITR 141 (Kar.); CIT v. Pamwi Tissues Ltd. [2009] 313 ITR 137 (Bom.); CIT v. Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sangh Ltd. [2013] 35 taxmann.com 616/217 Taxman 64 (Mag.)/[2014] 366 ITR 163 and Nipso Polyfabriks (supra) would reveal that in all these cases, the High Courts principally relied upon omission of second proviso to Section 43B (b). No doubt, many of…

Bec Projects Ltd., Bhilai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-1(1), Bhilai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 6/RPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 06/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Bec Projects Limited 4/5, Industrial Estate, Bhilai (C.G.)-490 020 Pan : Aaacb9275H .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-1(1), Bhilai (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Nilesh Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 34(1)(iv)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 438Section 43B

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण "यायपीठ रायपुर म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 06/RPR/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 BEC Projects Limited 4/5, Industrial Estate, Bhilai (C.G.)-490 020 PAN : AAACB9275H .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/s. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-1(1), Bhilai (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Nilesh Jain, CA Revenue by : Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 09.08.2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date of Pronou…