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

Kay Switcgears India Private Limited, Kapurthala vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4, Jalandhar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA 192/Asr/2022 is

ITA 24/ASR/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Apr 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.23/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Ess Ess Kay Engineering Co. Vs. Nfac, Delhi/C/O Asstt. Pvt. Ltd. Factory Area, Commissioner Of Income Jalandhar. Tax Circle-4, Jalandhar. [Pan: Aaace5057G] (Respondent) (Appellant)

Section 143(1)Section 250oSection 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.23/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Ess Ess Kay Engineering Co. Vs. NFAC, Delhi/C/o Asstt. Pvt. Ltd. Factory Area, Commissioner of Income Jalandhar. Tax Circle-4, Jalandhar. [PAN: AAACE5057G] (Respondent) (Appellant) I.T.A. No.24/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Kay Switchgears India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. NFAC, Delhi/ C/o Asstt. Factory Area, Jalandhar. Commissioner of Income [PAN: AAACK9954A] Tax Circle-4, Jalandhar. (Respondent) (Appellant) I.T.A. No.14/As…

Ess Ess Kay Engineering Compay Private Limited, Kapurthala vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4, Jalandhar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA 192/Asr/2022 is

ITA 23/ASR/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Apr 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.23/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Ess Ess Kay Engineering Co. Vs. Nfac, Delhi/C/O Asstt. Pvt. Ltd. Factory Area, Commissioner Of Income Jalandhar. Tax Circle-4, Jalandhar. [Pan: Aaace5057G] (Respondent) (Appellant)

Section 143(1)Section 250oSection 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.23/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Ess Ess Kay Engineering Co. Vs. NFAC, Delhi/C/o Asstt. Pvt. Ltd. Factory Area, Commissioner of Income Jalandhar. Tax Circle-4, Jalandhar. [PAN: AAACE5057G] (Respondent) (Appellant) I.T.A. No.24/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Kay Switchgears India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. NFAC, Delhi/ C/o Asstt. Factory Area, Jalandhar. Commissioner of Income [PAN: AAACK9954A] Tax Circle-4, Jalandhar. (Respondent) (Appellant) I.T.A. No.14/As…

M. K Hotel & Resorts Limited, Amritsar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Amritsar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA 192/Asr/2022 is

ITA 14/ASR/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Apr 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.23/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Ess Ess Kay Engineering Co. Vs. Nfac, Delhi/C/O Asstt. Pvt. Ltd. Factory Area, Commissioner Of Income Jalandhar. Tax Circle-4, Jalandhar. [Pan: Aaace5057G] (Respondent) (Appellant)

Section 143(1)Section 250oSection 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.23/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Ess Ess Kay Engineering Co. Vs. NFAC, Delhi/C/o Asstt. Pvt. Ltd. Factory Area, Commissioner of Income Jalandhar. Tax Circle-4, Jalandhar. [PAN: AAACE5057G] (Respondent) (Appellant) I.T.A. No.24/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Kay Switchgears India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. NFAC, Delhi/ C/o Asstt. Factory Area, Jalandhar. Commissioner of Income [PAN: AAACK9954A] Tax Circle-4, Jalandhar. (Respondent) (Appellant) I.T.A. No.14/As…

Shri Sachin Kapur, Jalandhar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 3 (2), Jalandhar

In the result, ITA No. 261/Asr/2022 is dismissed and ITA No

ITA 261/ASR/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar10 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

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

Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250oSection 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.261/Asr/2022 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Sachin Kapur Prop. M/s Kailash Vs. ADIT, CPC, Bangalore/ Autoworld 248-Model Town ITO, Ward 3(2), Jalandhar. Jalandhar. [PAN: AFZPK8204L] (Respondent) (Appellant) I.T.A. No.253/Asr/2022 Assessment Year: 2019-20 M/s Ramco Engg. Works, Sodal Vs. ITO, Ward 1(1), Road, Preet Nagar, Jalandhar. Jalandhar. Punjab. [PAN: AABFR1503L] (Respondent) (Appellant) Appellant by Sh. Vikas Bhagat, Adv. Respondent by Sh. Amit Jain, S…

M/S. Ramco Engg Works, Jalandhar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward- 1 (1), Jalandhar

In the result, ITA No. 261/Asr/2022 is dismissed and ITA No

ITA 253/ASR/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar10 Apr 2023AY 2019-20

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

Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250oSection 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.261/Asr/2022 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Sachin Kapur Prop. M/s Kailash Vs. ADIT, CPC, Bangalore/ Autoworld 248-Model Town ITO, Ward 3(2), Jalandhar. Jalandhar. [PAN: AFZPK8204L] (Respondent) (Appellant) I.T.A. No.253/Asr/2022 Assessment Year: 2019-20 M/s Ramco Engg. Works, Sodal Vs. ITO, Ward 1(1), Road, Preet Nagar, Jalandhar. Jalandhar. Punjab. [PAN: AABFR1503L] (Respondent) (Appellant) Appellant by Sh. Vikas Bhagat, Adv. Respondent by Sh. Amit Jain, S…

Smt Pushplata Chandrawat, Indore vs. The DCIT CPC, Banglore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 180/IND/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2018-19 Smt. Pushplata Chandrawat, V. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cpc, Bangalore. House No. 34-Bg, Scheme No. 74-C, Vijay Nagar, Indore Pan-Adapc8144L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Anil Kumar Garg & Arpit Gaur, Ca Respondent By: Sh. Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 01.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 06.03.2023

For Appellant: Anil Kumar Garg & Arpit Gaur, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR
Section 12ASection 138Section 143(1)

…a) wherein, it has been decided in favour of the assessee 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 8 Assessment Year. 2018-19 Smt. Pushplata Chandawat v. DCIT CPC, Bangalore. Polyfabriks (supra) would reveal that in all these cases, the High Courts principally…

M/S Laurels School and Management Institution P.Ltd., Indore vs. DCIT 1(1), Indore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 137/IND/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Laurels School & V. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cpc, Bangalore. Management Institutions Pvt. Ltd. 7, Press Complex, A.B. Road, Behind Dainik Bhaskar Press, Indore. Pan-Aaacl4970D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Anil Kumar Garg & Arpit Gaur, Ca Respondent By: Sh. Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 01.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 06.04.2023

For Appellant: Anil Kumar Garg & Arpit Gaur, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR
Section 12ASection 138Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

…a) wherein, it has been decided in favour of the assessee 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…

M/S Beltex Rubber India, Jalandhar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward- 1 (1), Jalandhar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA 192/Asr/2022 is dismissed

ITA 9/ASR/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar17 Mar 2023AY 2019-20

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

Section 143(1)Section 250o

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. Nos. 8 & 9/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-19 & 2019-20 M/s Beltex Rubber India, New Vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), colony, Aman Nagar, Jalandhar, Jalandhar. Punjab. [PAN: AAAFB6664R] (Respondent) (Appellant) Appellant by None: (Written submission) Respondent by Sh. Prashant Singh, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 13.03.2023 Date of Pronouncement 17 .03.2023 ORDER Per:Anikesh Banerjee, JM: The instant appeals of the assessee are directed against the order of the ld. Commissio…

M/S Beltex Rubber India, Jalandhar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward - 1 (1), Jalandhar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA 192/Asr/2022 is dismissed

ITA 8/ASR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar17 Mar 2023AY 2018-19

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

Section 143(1)Section 250o

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. Nos. 8 & 9/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-19 & 2019-20 M/s Beltex Rubber India, New Vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), colony, Aman Nagar, Jalandhar, Jalandhar. Punjab. [PAN: AAAFB6664R] (Respondent) (Appellant) Appellant by None: (Written submission) Respondent by Sh. Prashant Singh, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 13.03.2023 Date of Pronouncement 17 .03.2023 ORDER Per:Anikesh Banerjee, JM: The instant appeals of the assessee are directed against the order of the ld. Commissio…

K M Automobiles, Korba vs. Income Tax Officer -1, Korba

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

ITA 100/RPR/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur06 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 100/Rpr/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 K M Automobiles Plot No.187, Transport Nagar, Korba, Chhatisgarh-495 677 Pan: Aanfk0386L .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer-1, Korba (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)

…under section 36(1)(va). 1.2. The learned CIT(A) NFAC has erred in not following the ratio of the decisions, among others, of the Supreme Court in CIT v Alom Extrusions (2009) 319 ITR 306 (SC), Karnataka High Court decision in CIT v Sabari Enterprises (2008) 298 ITR 141 (KAR), CIT v Spectrum Consultants India (P.) Ltd (2014) 266 CTR 241(Kar), CIT v Kichaa Sugar Co Ltd (2013) 356 ITR 351, CIT v Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sangh Ltd (2014) 366 ITR 163 (Rajasthan) and Bihar State Warehousing Corporation Ltd v CIT (2016) 71 taxmann.com 247 (Pat). 1.3. The learned CIT(A) NFAC has erred in interpreting the amendmen…

M/S Tesla Transformers (India) Ltd, Bhopal vs. ACIT 3(1) Bhopal, Bhopal

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 190/IND/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Indore02 Mar 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S. Tesla Transformers Acit 3(1) (India) Ltd. Bhopal Vs. Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aagct 8705 J Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 28.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 02.03.2023

Section 115BSection 143(1)

…yers retaining amounts for long periods. That Commissioner of Income-Tax Vs. Aimil Ltd., [2010] 321 ITR 508 (Delhi High Court). Page 5 of 8 M/s. Tesla Transformers (India) Ltd. Page 6 of 8 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…

Tempo Automobiles (P) Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT CPC, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1836/DEL/2020[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: None
Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40A(7)

…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…

Anjani Kumar Dwivedi, Durg vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 98/RPR/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur20 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 98/Rpr/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Anjani Kumar Dwivedi Qtr. No. Lc 6/D, Street No.18, Camp-1, Bhilai, Dist. Durg (C.G.)-490 023 Pan: Aigpd3229G .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Asstt. Director Of Income Tax, Cpc, Bengaluru ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: None (Written submission)For Respondent: Shri Gitesh Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 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 DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 98/RPR/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Anjani Kumar Dwivedi QTR. No. LC 6/D, Street No.18, Camp-1, Bhilai, Dist. Durg (C.G.)-490 023 PAN: AIGPD3229G .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/s. The Asstt. Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee by : None (Written submission) Revenue by : Shri Gitesh Kumar, Sr. DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 01.12.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख…

Nimbus Pipes Limited, Jaipur vs. ACIT Circle-4, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 384/JPR/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Feb 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Badaya (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri R.S. Meel (JCIT)
Section 154Section 36(1)(va)

…s provident fund and ESI cannot be disallowed under section 43 B. if paid before the due date of filling the return. Relevant case laws in favour of appellant are:-  M/s EssaeTeraoka Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT (366 ITR 408) [2014] (Karnataka); CIT VsSabari Enterprises (298 ITR 141) [2008] (Karnataka),  CIT Vs Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd and Rajasthan Rajya Vidut Utpadan  Nigam Ltd (363 ITR 307) [2014] (Rajasthan):  CIT VS Rajasthan State Beverages Corporation Ltd 84 taxmann.com 173 [2017] (Rajasthan) 7 Nimbus Pipes Limited  CIT Vs Vijay Shree Ltd (43 taxmann.com 396) [2014] (Calcutta).  CIT VS Ghatge Patil Transp…

United Security Solution Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT CPC Ward- 27(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 535/DEL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: N o n e
Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 34(1)(iv)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…) 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). 3 I.T.A. No. 535/Del/2021 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…

B4S Solution P.Ltd, Ghaziabad vs. ACIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi

In the result, Appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2187/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali
Section 10(34)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 2(24)Section 3Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

…id the mischief of employers retaining amounts for long periods. That Commissioner of Income-Tax Vs. Aimil Ltd., [2010] 321 ITR 508 (Delhi High Court). 21 M/s. B4S Solution P. Ltd., G’bad 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…

Prisma, Moradabad vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Moradabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1197/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad, S.M.C.

For Appellant: N o n e
Section 139(1)Section 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…

Navodia Times Private Limited, Jalandhar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Jalandhar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA 192/Asr/2022 is

ITA 192/ASR/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 Jan 2023AY 2018-19

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

Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 234CSection 250oSection 36

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.192/Asr/2022 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Navodaya Times Private Ltd. Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Civil Lines, Jalandhar, Punjab. Income Tax, Circle-1, [PAN: AAECN9393A] Jalandhar. (Respondent) (Appellant) Appellant by Sh. Sandeep Vijh, CA Respondent by Ms. Priyanka Singla, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 26.12.2022 Date of Pronouncement 31.01.2023 ORDER Per:Anikesh Banerjee, JM: The instant appeal of the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. Commissione…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle, Korba vs. M/S. Dee Vee Project Ltd., Korba

In the result, appeal of the revenue is allowed/partly allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 69/RPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur23 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri G D Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.69/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle, Korba (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Dee Vee Project Ltd. First Floor, Vikas Complex, P.H. Road, Korba (C.G.) Pan : Aaecd4619B ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Chand Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.N Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 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 G D PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.69/RPR/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle, Korba (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/s. M/s. Dee Vee Project Ltd. First Floor, Vikas Complex, P.H. Road, Korba (C.G.) PAN : AAECD4619B ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Prakash Chand Agrawal, CA Revenue by : Shri G.N Singh, Sr. DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 22.11.2022 घोषणा क" तार"…

Shri Dharmendra Hirubhai Patel, Surat vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangluru, Surat

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 139/SRT/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat10 Jan 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.139/Srt/2021 Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Physical Court Hearing) Dharmendra Hirubhai Patel, Vs. The Dcit, Cpc, Motawada Steet, At & Po. Hazira, Bangluru. Tal: Choryasi, Surat – 394270. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Amhpp6575A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Deven Kapadia, Ar Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 04/01/2023 10/01/2023 Date Of Pronouncement

Section 143(1)Section 2(24)Section 3Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 40A(2)Section 41Section 43Section 43B

…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…