350 ITR 326 10. CIT v. Merchem Ltd.

291 CTR 557High Court2017#2865 most cited

What is 350 ITR 326 10. CIT v. Merchem Ltd. authority for?

An employer's delayed deposit of employees' contributions to provident fund (PF) or Employees' State Insurance Corporation (ESIC) is deductible if the amounts are deposited before the due date for filing the income tax return.

41

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2024.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Merchem Ltd. · Merchem Ltd. · 350 ITR 326 · 291 CTR 557 · employees contribution to PF · ESIC contribution · Section 36(1)(va) · Section 43B · due date of ITR filing · late deposit of welfare contributions

Issues it is cited on

section 2(c)section 36(l)section 36(va)section 43b(b)extension of limitationsection 2(24)(x)employees contribution to pfsection 2(24)section 36(1)(va)section 43bsection 36(1)section 43

Judgments citing 350 ITR 326 10. CIT v. Merchem Ltd.

EBRO INDIA PVT.LTD. ,DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-7(1), DELHI

In the result, the ground no 4 raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1291/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Delhi09 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 68

…s India (P) Ltd. v. CIT: 215 Taxman 597 (Kar.)  CIT v. Kichha Sugar Company Ltd.: ITA No.50 of 2009 (Utt.)  CIT vs. Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd : 368 ITR 749 (Bom.)  S.R Batliboi& Co. vs ACIT : 100 taxmann.com 328 (Cal.)  Sagun foundry (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT : 291 CTR 557 (All.)  Pr. CIT vs. Rajasthan State Beverages Corpn. Ltd. 250 Taxman 32 (Raj) – Revenue’s SLP dismissed – reported @ 250 Taxman 16 (SC)  CIT v. Lakhani Rubber Works: 326 ITR 415 (P&H)  Hitech India (P.) Ltd. vs. Union of India: 227 ITR 446 (AP) 82. It is pertinent to note that there has also been an Internal Circulation dated 10th September 20…

PRIVATE EYE PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 681/BANG/2022[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Sept 2022AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice Preseident & Shri Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Sudheendra B.R., AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Shankar Prasad K., Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 2Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 6

…ITO ITA No. 51&54- 55/Jodh/2021 [Assessment Year: 2018-19] dated 28.09.2021; 8. CIT v. Aimil Ltd. [2010] 321 ITR 508 9. CIT v. Nipso Polyfabriks Ltd. [2013] 350 ITR 326 10. CIT vs. Merchem Ltd. 378 ITR 443 (Kerala)) 11. Sagun Foundry (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT [2017] 291 CTR 557 (Allahabad) 12. Bata India Ltd. vs. DCIT [2020] 180 ITD 464 (Kolkata - Trib.) 13. DCIT vs. Eastern Power Distribution Company of A.P. Ltd. [2016] 160 lTD 432 (Visakhapatnam - Trib.) 14. Nuzivedu Swati Coastal Consortium vs. ITO [2015] 62 taxmann.com 258 (Hyderabad - Trib.) 15. DCIT vs. Teesta Valley Tea Co. Ltd. [2017] 85 taxmann.com 301 (Kolkata…

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. M/S RAJASTHAN RAJYA VIDHYUT UTPADAN NIGAM LTD, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 276/JPR/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Aug 2022AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)Section 26(1)(va)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…eets India (P) Ltd. vs ACIT, ITA No. 402 & 403/CHNY/2021 ITAT Chennai dated 8-12- 2021 ( r ) Jagmohan Singh Vs DCIT, ITA Nos. 185 & 193/CHD/2021 ITAT Chandigarh dated 15-12-2021 (s) Inderjit Bajaj vs DCIT, Circle-1, Jalandhar (ITAT Amritsar) (t) Sagun Foundry 291 CTR 557 (All.) (u) Vinko Auto Industries Ltd. Vs DCIT, CPC, Bangalore (supra) (v) DRP Metal Works (Regd.) vs ADIT (supra) and Sube Singh vs ITO, ITA No. 85/ASR/2021 Following the aforesaid decisions, the claim of the appellant is allowed. Accordingly, the disallowance of Rs.2,52,50,269/- made u/s 36(1)(va) is deleted and ground No. 1 of appeal is allowed…

WELL PROTECT MANPOWER SERVICES PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CPC, BANGLORE

In the result, we do not perceive any merit in this appeal and accordingly the same stands dismissed

ITA 1094/DEL/2020[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jul 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. B.R.R.Kumar & Sh. Anubhav Sharmawell Protect Manpower Vs. Dcit, Services Pvt. Ltd. Cpc, F 22, 2Nd Floor Khasra 737/3 & Bangalore 737/6 Near Mcd School 100 Futa Road, Burari, Delhi-34 Pan : Aaacw4672R (Appellant) (Respondent)

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

…j) Nigam Ltd. 8. Essae Teraoka P. Ltd. vs. DCIT [2014] 366 ITR 408 (Kar) 9. CIT vs. Ghatge Patil Transports [2014] 368 ITR 749 (Bom) Ltd. 10. CIT vs. Rajasthan State Beverages [2017] 393 ITR 421 (Raj) Corporation Ltd. 11. Sagun Foundry (P) Ltd. vs. CIT [2017] 291 CTR 557 (All) That on the facts of the case and under the law, the 4. addition of Rs.1,81,77,791/- (which was made on the ground that the appellant had failed to deposit the employee's contribution to PF & ESIC before the due dates) deserves to be deleted because the entire amount on a/c of PF & ESIC were deposited within few days, positively before the…

BHUPENDRA NATH PANDEY,VARANASI vs. ACIT, R - 03, VARANASI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is in ITA No

ITA 31/VNS/2021[2018-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi07 Jul 2022AY 2018-2016

Bench: Shrivijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2018-19 Bhupendra Nath Pandey Assistant Director Of Income 6-159/27, Kashi Enclave V. Tax (Cpc), Centralized Colony, Pahadiya Sarnath, Processing Center , Varanasi-221007, U.P. Bengaluru-560500 (The Acit, Range-3, Varanasi, U.P.) Pan:Ajfpp1273J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Deepak K Gujarati, CAFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ndment made by Finance Act, 2021, was adjudicated in favour of the tax-payer. The ld. Counsel for the assessee would also rely on judgment and order passed by Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Sagun Foundry Private Limited v. CIT, reported in (2017) 291 CTR 557(All. HC). 4.2. The ld. DR on the other hand submitted that the amendments made by Finance Act, 2021 in Section 36(1)(va) and 43B are retrospective in nature as it is merely clarificatory in nature. The ld. Sr. DR submitted that the statute is very clear as Section 36(1)(va) clearly mandates that employees share of PF/ESI collected by employer fro…

SHRI NEERAJ MAHESHWARI,SONEBHADRA vs. DY. CIT, (CPC), BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 18/ALLD/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad10 May 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Before Shri. Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Neeraj Maheshwari, V. Shri Amrit Raj Singh, Bijpur Rihand Nagar, Sonebhadra- Dy. Commissioner Of Inco Tax, 2312233, U.P. Cpc Bangalore Pan- Afvpm5660E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Sh. A.K. Pandey, Adv Respondent By: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 09.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 10.05.2022 O R D E R

For Appellant: Sh. A.K. Pandey, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 234BSection 250Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B

…e of filling of return of income under Section 139(1) is covered by the decisions of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court as well other High Courts. The Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Sagun Foundry Private Limited vs. Commissioner of Income Tax 291 CTR 557 decided this issue in favour of the assessee. At the outset, it is noted that this Tribunal in the case of Commercial Auto Sales Pvt. Ltd., vs. DCIT in ITA No. 13/Alld/2021, vide order dated 16.12.2021 has again considered and decided an identical issue in para 5 as under:- “5. We have considered rival contentions and perused the material on reco…

SUNLIGHT MACHINE TOOLS,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are allowed

ITA 47/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 May 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: None eFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 6

…ITO ITA No. 51&54- 55/Jodh/2021 [Assessment Year: 2018-19] dated 28.09.2021; 8. CIT v. Aimil Ltd. [2010] 321 ITR 508 9. CIT v. Nipso Polyfabriks Ltd. [2013] 350 ITR 326 10. CIT vs. Merchem Ltd. 378 ITR 443 (Kerala)) 11. Sagun Foundry (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT [2017] 291 CTR 557 (Allahabad) 12. Bata India Ltd. vs. DCIT [2020] 180 lTD 464 (Kolkata - Trib.) 13. DCIT vs. Eastern Power Distribution Company of A.P. Ltd. [2016] 160 lTD 432 (Visakhapatnam - Trib.) 14. Nuzivedu Swati Coastal Consortium vs. ITO [2015] 62 taxmann.com 258 (Hyderabad - Trib.) 15. DCIT vs. Teesta Valley Tea Co. Ltd. [2017] 85 taxmann.com 301 (Kolkata…

SUNLIGHT MACHINE TOOLS,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are allowed

ITA 46/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 May 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: None eFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 6

…ITO ITA No. 51&54- 55/Jodh/2021 [Assessment Year: 2018-19] dated 28.09.2021; 8. CIT v. Aimil Ltd. [2010] 321 ITR 508 9. CIT v. Nipso Polyfabriks Ltd. [2013] 350 ITR 326 10. CIT vs. Merchem Ltd. 378 ITR 443 (Kerala)) 11. Sagun Foundry (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT [2017] 291 CTR 557 (Allahabad) 12. Bata India Ltd. vs. DCIT [2020] 180 lTD 464 (Kolkata - Trib.) 13. DCIT vs. Eastern Power Distribution Company of A.P. Ltd. [2016] 160 lTD 432 (Visakhapatnam - Trib.) 14. Nuzivedu Swati Coastal Consortium vs. ITO [2015] 62 taxmann.com 258 (Hyderabad - Trib.) 15. DCIT vs. Teesta Valley Tea Co. Ltd. [2017] 85 taxmann.com 301 (Kolkata…

ALERT MANPOWER,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are allowed

ITA 36/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 May 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: None eFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ITO ITA No. 51&54- 55/Jodh/2021 [Assessment Year: 2018-19] dated 28.09.2021; 8. CIT v. Aimil Ltd. [2010] 321 ITR 508 9. CIT v. Nipso Polyfabriks Ltd. [2013] 350 ITR 326 10. CIT vs. Merchem Ltd. 378 ITR 443 (Kerala)) 11. Sagun Foundry (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT [2017] 291 CTR 557 (Allahabad) 12. Bata India Ltd. vs. DCIT [2020] 180 lTD 464 (Kolkata - Trib.) 13. DCIT vs. Eastern Power Distribution Company of A.P. Ltd. [2016] 160 lTD 432 (Visakhapatnam - Trib.) 14. Nuzivedu Swati Coastal Consortium vs. ITO [2015] 62 taxmann.com 258 (Hyderabad - Trib.) 15. DCIT vs. Teesta Valley Tea Co. Ltd. [2017] 85 taxmann.com 301 (Kolkata…

ALERT MANPOWER,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are allowed

ITA 35/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 May 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: None eFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ITO ITA No. 51&54- 55/Jodh/2021 [Assessment Year: 2018-19] dated 28.09.2021; 8. CIT v. Aimil Ltd. [2010] 321 ITR 508 9. CIT v. Nipso Polyfabriks Ltd. [2013] 350 ITR 326 10. CIT vs. Merchem Ltd. 378 ITR 443 (Kerala)) 11. Sagun Foundry (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT [2017] 291 CTR 557 (Allahabad) 12. Bata India Ltd. vs. DCIT [2020] 180 lTD 464 (Kolkata - Trib.) 13. DCIT vs. Eastern Power Distribution Company of A.P. Ltd. [2016] 160 lTD 432 (Visakhapatnam - Trib.) 14. Nuzivedu Swati Coastal Consortium vs. ITO [2015] 62 taxmann.com 258 (Hyderabad - Trib.) 15. DCIT vs. Teesta Valley Tea Co. Ltd. [2017] 85 taxmann.com 301 (Kolkata…

M/S. FUTURA DIGITAL COLOR PRESS,BENGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5(2)(1), BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 743/BANG/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 May 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Ms. Sunaina Bhatia, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 6

…sessment Year: 2018-19] dated 28.09.2021; ITA Nos.743/Bang/2021 Page 7 of 8 8. CIT v. Aimil Ltd. [2010] 321 ITR 508 9. CIT v. Nipso Polyfabriks Ltd. [2013] 350 ITR 326 10. CIT vs. Merchem Ltd. 378 ITR 443 (Kerala)) 11. Sagun Foundry (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT [2017] 291 CTR 557 (Allahabad) 12. Bata India Ltd. vs. DCIT [2020] 180 lTD 464 (Kolkata - Trib.) 13. DCIT vs. Eastern Power Distribution Company of A.P. Ltd. [2016] 160 lTD 432 (Visakhapatnam - Trib.) 14. Nuzivedu Swati Coastal Consortium vs. ITO [2015] 62 taxmann.com 258 (Hyderabad - Trib.) 15. DCIT vs. Teesta Valley Tea Co. Ltd. [2017] 85 taxmann.com 301 (Kolkata…

SRI BASAVARAJ GUNJEGAI,BENGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 742/BANG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 May 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Ms. Sunaina Bhatia, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…sessment Year: 2018-19] dated 28.09.2021; ITA Nos.742/Bang/2021 Page 8 of 9 8. CIT v. Aimil Ltd. [2010] 321 ITR 508 9. CIT v. Nipso Polyfabriks Ltd. [2013] 350 ITR 326 10. CIT vs. Merchem Ltd. 378 ITR 443 (Kerala)) 11. Sagun Foundry (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT [2017] 291 CTR 557 (Allahabad) 12. Bata India Ltd. vs. DCIT [2020] 180 lTD 464 (Kolkata - Trib.) 13. DCIT vs. Eastern Power Distribution Company of A.P. Ltd. [2016] 160 lTD 432 (Visakhapatnam - Trib.) 14. Nuzivedu Swati Coastal Consortium vs. ITO [2015] 62 taxmann.com 258 (Hyderabad - Trib.) 15. DCIT vs. Teesta Valley Tea Co. Ltd. [2017] 85 taxmann.com 301 (Kolkata…

M.W.S. & CO.,BHADOHI vs. DY. C.I.T., RANGE - 1, VARANASI

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 25/VNS/2021[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi19 Apr 2022AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2018-19 & Assessment Year: 2019-20 M.W.S. & Co., Naya Bazar V. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Road, Bhadohi-221401, Uttar Central Processing Centre (Cpc), Pradesh, India Bengaluru [Jurisdictional Assessing Pan-Aaffm2003E Officer Being Dy./Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range-1, Varanasi, U.P. (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Ashish Bansal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B

…e of filling of return of income under Section 139(1) is covered by the decisions of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court as well other High Courts. The Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Sagun Foundry Private Limited vs. Commissioner of Income Tax 291 CTR 557 decided this issue in favour of the assessee. At the outset, it is noted that this Tribunal in the case of Commercial Auto Sales Pvt. Ltd., vs. DCIT in ITA No. 13/Alld/2021, vide order dated 16.12.2021 has again considered and decided an identical issue in para 5 as under:- “5. We have considered rival contentions and perused the material on reco…

M.W.S. & CO.,BHADOHI vs. DY. C.I.T., RANGE - 1, VARANASI

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 24/VNS/2021[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi19 Apr 2022AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2018-19 & Assessment Year: 2019-20 M.W.S. & Co., Naya Bazar V. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Road, Bhadohi-221401, Uttar Central Processing Centre (Cpc), Pradesh, India Bengaluru [Jurisdictional Assessing Pan-Aaffm2003E Officer Being Dy./Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range-1, Varanasi, U.P. (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Ashish Bansal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B

…e of filling of return of income under Section 139(1) is covered by the decisions of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court as well other High Courts. The Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Sagun Foundry Private Limited vs. Commissioner of Income Tax 291 CTR 557 decided this issue in favour of the assessee. At the outset, it is noted that this Tribunal in the case of Commercial Auto Sales Pvt. Ltd., vs. DCIT in ITA No. 13/Alld/2021, vide order dated 16.12.2021 has again considered and decided an identical issue in para 5 as under:- “5. We have considered rival contentions and perused the material on reco…

IKON LABELS PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 49/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Rajkamal Ganeriwala, CAFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshini Mishra, Addl. CIT(DR)(ITAT) Bangalore
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 6

…ITO ITA No. 51&54- 55/Jodh/2021 [Assessment Year: 2018-19] dated 28.09.2021; 8. CIT v. Aimil Ltd. [2010] 321 ITR 508 9. CIT v. Nipso Polyfabriks Ltd. [2013] 350 ITR 326 10. CIT vs. Merchem Ltd. 378 ITR 443 (Kerala)) 11. Sagun Foundry (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT [2017] 291 CTR 557 (Allahabad) 12. Bata India Ltd. vs. DCIT [2020] 180 ITD 464 (Kolkata - Trib.) 13. DCIT vs. Eastern Power Distribution Company of A.P. Ltd. [2016] 160 ITD 432 (Visakhapatnam - Trib.) 14. Nuzivedu Swati Coastal Consortium vs. ITO [2015] 62 taxmann.com 258 (Hyderabad - Trib.) 15. DCIT vs. Teesta Valley Tea Co. Ltd. [2017] 85 taxmann.com 301 (Kolkata…

RADIUS ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 45/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Mar 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh, G., CAFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 6

…ITO ITA No. 51&54- 55/Jodh/2021 [Assessment Year: 2018-19] dated 28.09.2021; 8. CIT v. Aimil Ltd. [2010] 321 ITR 508 9. CIT v. Nipso Polyfabriks Ltd. [2013] 350 ITR 326 10. CIT vs. Merchem Ltd. 378 ITR 443 (Kerala)) 11. Sagun Foundry (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT [2017] 291 CTR 557 (Allahabad) 12. Bata India Ltd. vs. DCIT [2020] 180 ITD 464 (Kolkata - Trib.) 13. DCIT vs. Eastern Power Distribution Company of A.P. Ltd. [2016] 160 lTD 432 (Visakhapatnam - Trib.) 14. Nuzivedu Swati Coastal Consortium vs. ITO [2015] 62 taxmann.com 258 (Hyderabad - Trib.) 15. DCIT vs. Teesta Valley Tea Co. Ltd. [2017] 85 taxmann.com 301 (Kolkata…

TECHNOCON BUILDERS,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(2)(1) REPRESENTED BY DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 42/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Rajagopal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 6

…51&54- 55/Jodh/2021 [Assessment Year: 2018-19] dated 28.09.2021; Page 7 of 8 8. CIT v. Aimil Ltd. [2010] 321 ITR 508 9. CIT v. Nipso Polyfabriks Ltd. [2013] 350 ITR 326 10. CIT vs. Merchem Ltd. 378 ITR 443 (Kerala)) 11. Sagun Foundry (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT [2017] 291 CTR 557 (Allahabad) 12. Bata India Ltd. vs. DCIT [2020] 180 ITD 464 (Kolkata - Trib.) 13. DCIT vs. Eastern Power Distribution Company of A.P. Ltd. [2016] 160 lTD 432 (Visakhapatnam - Trib.) 14. Nuzivedu Swati Coastal Consortium vs. ITO [2015] 62 taxmann.com 258 (Hyderabad - Trib.) 15. DCIT vs. Teesta Valley Tea Co. Ltd. [2017] 85 taxmann.com 301 (Kolkata…

SRI MARIGANTU NARASIMHA CHARI,BENGALURU vs. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(2)(1), BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 38/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ITO ITA No. 51&54- 55/Jodh/2021 [Assessment Year: 2018-19] dated 28.09.2021; 8. CIT v. Aimil Ltd. [2010] 321 ITR 508 9. CIT v. Nipso Polyfabriks Ltd. [2013] 350 ITR 326 10. CIT vs. Merchem Ltd. 378 ITR 443 (Kerala)) 11. Sagun Foundry (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT [2017] 291 CTR 557 (Allahabad) 12. Bata India Ltd. vs. DCIT [2020] 180 lTD 464 (Kolkata - Trib.) 13. DCIT vs. Eastern Power Distribution Company of A.P. Ltd. [2016] 160 lTD 432 (Visakhapatnam - Trib.) 14. Nuzivedu Swati Coastal Consortium vs. ITO [2015] 62 taxmann.com 258 (Hyderabad - Trib.) 15. DCIT vs. Teesta Valley Tea Co. Ltd. [2017] 85 taxmann.com 301 (Kolkata…

PUYVAST MARITIME INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1) REPRESENTED BY ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 30/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Mar 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Rajgopal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 250Section 30Section 32Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ITO ITA No. 51&54- 55/Jodh/2021 [Assessment Year: 2018-19] dated 28.09.2021; 8. CIT v. Aimil Ltd. [2010] 321 ITR 508 9. CIT v. Nipso Polyfabriks Ltd. [2013] 350 ITR 326 10. CIT vs. Merchem Ltd. 378 ITR 443 (Kerala)) 11. Sagun Foundry (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT [2017] 291 CTR 557 (Allahabad) 12. Bata India Ltd. vs. DCIT [2020] 180 lTD 464 (Kolkata - Trib.) 13. DCIT vs. Eastern Power Distribution Company of A.P. Ltd. [2016] 160 lTD 432 (Visakhapatnam - Trib.) 14. Nuzivedu Swati Coastal Consortium vs. ITO [2015] 62 taxmann.com 258 (Hyderabad - Trib.) 15. DCIT vs. Teesta Valley Tea Co. Ltd. [2017] 85 taxmann.com 301 (Kolkata…

M/S UDVASIT BEROJGAR SAHAKARI SHRAM SAMVIDA SAMITI LTD.,,SONBHADRA vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), ALLAHABAD

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

ITA 27/ALLD/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad02 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Raoassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 2Section 36(1)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ALLAHABAD ‘SMC’ BENCH, ALLAHABAD BEFORE SHRI.VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/s Udvasit Berojgar Sahakari v. Exemption Ward, Allahabad Shram Samvida Samiti Ltd., U.P. 211001 Khadia, Yogichaura, Shaktinagar, Sonbhadra-231222 PAN-AAATU1540K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: None Respondent by: Mr. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 15.03.2022 Date of pronouncement: 16.03.2022 O R D E R VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 27.10.2021 of CIT(A)-National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi fo…

Showing 1–20 of 41 · Page 1 of 3

350 ITR 326 10. CIT v. Merchem Ltd. (291 CTR 557) — Cited in 41 Judgments | BharatTax