616 (Raj.) and 9. CIT v. Hemla Embroidery Mills (P) Ltd.
217 Taxmann 207High Court2013#566 most cited
What is 616 (Raj.) and 9. CIT v. Hemla Embroidery Mills (P) Ltd. authority for?
Before the insertion of Explanation 2 to Section 36(1)(va), there was ambiguity regarding the due date for payment of employees' contribution to provident fund and ESI. The intended purpose of a tax amendment is to remove hardship for the assessee, not the Department.
170
judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.
Also referred to as
CIT v. Hemla Embroidery Mills (P) Ltd. · Section 36(1)(va) · employees' contribution · provident fund · ESI · due date · explanation 2 · tax amendment · retrospective amendment · ambiguity
Also reported as
37 Taxmann.com 160
Issues it is cited on
Judgments citing 616 (Raj.) and 9. CIT v. Hemla Embroidery Mills (P) Ltd.
Showing 1–20 of 170 · Page 1 of 9
...