B.S. Patel v. Dy. CIT

326 ITR 457High Court2010#4674 most cited

What is B.S. Patel v. Dy. CIT authority for?

An employer cannot claim a deduction for employee contributions to provident or welfare funds if they are not deposited by the prescribed due date under section 36(1)(va), even if deposited before the income tax return filing deadline under section 43B. The Supreme Court's decision in Alom Extrusions Ltd. is not applicable to employee contributions.

25

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2021 to 2022.

Also referred to as

B.S. Patel v. Dy. CIT · 326 ITR 457 · section 36(1)(va) · section 43B · employee contribution · provident fund · deduction · due date · income tax return · Alom Extrusions Ltd.

Judgments citing B.S. Patel v. Dy. CIT

Mukesh Kalway, Jabalpur vs. Asstt. Director of Income Tax CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are allowed

ITA 43/JAB/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur16 Sept 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon’Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri G.N. Purohit, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shiv Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43B

…urisdictional High Court (also see para 4.2). No such decision, however, despite asking, stands brought to our notice by the parties, or otherwise found. We are conscious of the decision by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in B.S. Patel v. Dy. CIT [2010] 326 ITR 457 (MP). The same, also noticed in Nikhil Mohine (supra), is not on the point and, therefore, of no assistance to the Revenue. Per the same, the Hon’ble High Court has opined on the prospective nature of the omission of the second proviso to s. 43B by Finance Act, 2003, w.e.f. 01/4/2004, so that the same would not, in it’s view, impact the disallowa…

Mukesh Kalway, Jabalpur vs. Asstt. Director of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are allowed

ITA 32/JAB/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur16 Sept 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon’Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri G.N. Purohit, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shiv Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43B

…urisdictional High Court (also see para 4.2). No such decision, however, despite asking, stands brought to our notice by the parties, or otherwise found. We are conscious of the decision by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in B.S. Patel v. Dy. CIT [2010] 326 ITR 457 (MP). The same, also noticed in Nikhil Mohine (supra), is not on the point and, therefore, of no assistance to the Revenue. Per the same, the Hon’ble High Court has opined on the prospective nature of the omission of the second proviso to s. 43B by Finance Act, 2003, w.e.f. 01/4/2004, so that the same would not, in it’s view, impact the disallowa…

M/S R S Cargo, Satna vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Processing Centre, Bangalore

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 12/JAB/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur06 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon’Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Rahul Bardia, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Ravi Mehrotra, Sr.DR
Section 1Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43B

…para 4.2). No such decision, however, despite asking, stands brought to our notice by the parties, or otherwise found. We are conscious of the reliance by the ld. CIT(A) on the decision by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in B.S. Patel v. Dy. CIT [2010] 326 ITR 457 (MP). The same, also noticed in Nikhil Mohine (supra), is not on the point and, therefore, of no assistance to the Revenue. Per the same, the Hon’ble High Court has opined on the prospective nature of the omission of the second proviso to s. 43B by Finance Act, 2003, w.e.f. 01/4/2004, so that the same would not, in it’s view, impact the disallowa…

Primo Pick Pack Private Limited, Jabalpur vs. Deputh Commissioner of Income Tax CPC, Bangalore Officer Isacit, Circle2(1) Jabalpur, Jabalpur

In the result, the appeals by the assessees are allowed

ITA 30/JAB/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur28 Jun 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon’Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Dhiraj Ghai, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Shiv Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 44A

…n/s by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court (also see para 4.2). No such decision, however, despite asking, stands brought to our notice by the parties, or otherwise found. The decision by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in B.S. Patel v. Dy. CIT [2010] 326 ITR 457 (MP), also noticed in Nikhil Mohine (supra), is not squarely on the point and, therefore, of no assistance to the Revenue. Per the same, the Hon’ble High Court has opined on the prospective nature of the omission of the second proviso to s. 43B by Finance Act, 2003, w.e.f. 01/4/2004, so that the same would not, in it’s view, impact the disallowan…

Geomin Industries Private Limited, Jabalpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income 2(1)CPC Tax, CPC, Jabalpur

In the result, the appeals by the assessees are allowed

ITA 57/JAB/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur28 Jun 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon’Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Dhiraj Ghai, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Shiv Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 44A

…n/s by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court (also see para 4.2). No such decision, however, despite asking, stands brought to our notice by the parties, or otherwise found. The decision by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in B.S. Patel v. Dy. CIT [2010] 326 ITR 457 (MP), also noticed in Nikhil Mohine (supra), is not squarely on the point and, therefore, of no assistance to the Revenue. Per the same, the Hon’ble High Court has opined on the prospective nature of the omission of the second proviso to s. 43B by Finance Act, 2003, w.e.f. 01/4/2004, so that the same would not, in it’s view, impact the disallowan…

Neeraj Purohit, Jaipur vs. CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessees is allowed

ITA 81/JPR/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Apr 2022AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.CIT) a
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…an Nigam Ltd and Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Niga, Ltd (2014) 363 ITR 307. 4. State Bank jof Bikaner & Jaipur 363 ITR 70. 5. Peerless General Finance and Investment Co. (Calcutta H.C.) 6. Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd. (2014) 366 ITR 408 (Kar.) 7. BS Patel (2010) 326 ITR 457 (M.P.) 8. Bihar State Warehousing Corporation Ltd. (2017) 393 ITR 386 (Patna H.C.) 9. Sagun Foundry Private Limited (2017) 145 DTR 0265 (All) 10. George Williamson (Assam) Limited (2006) 284 ITR 619 (Assam) 11. Lakhani Rummber Udyog (2009) 312 ITR 0014. 9. The assessee before the ld. CIT(A) also contended that the amendment brought in by the Fina…

M/S A R Transport, Satna vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, Ward 2 Satna.Central Processing Centre, Bangalore, Karnaataka

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 7/JAB/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur07 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora, Hon'Ble & Sh. Manomohan Das, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2019-20 A R Transport, Assistant Director Of Income Vs. Tax, Central Processing Satna, (M.P.) Centre, Bangalore [Pan : Aayfa 6634L] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Written Submissions Respondent By Sh. Rajesh Kumar Gupta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 07/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 07/04/2022

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43B

…n/s by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court (also see para 4.2). No such decision, however, despite asking, stands brought to our notice by the parties, or otherwise found. The decision by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in B.S. Patel v. Dy. CIT [2010] 326 ITR 457 (MP), also noticed in Nikhil Mohine (supra), is not squarely on the point and, therefore, of no assistance to the Revenue. As regards the aspect of the retrospective nature of the Explanations under reference, we again find no 5 AR Transport v. Asst. DIT difference in the view expressed in the impugned order/s, with that by the Tribunal in Nikhil…

Gujral Hotels Private Limited, Jabalpur vs. DCIT, Circle 2(1) Jabalpur, Jabalpur

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed

ITA 18/JAB/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur07 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora, Hon'Ble & Sh. Manomohan Das, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2018-19 Gujral Hotels Private Limited, Dy. Cit, Circle-2(1), Vs. Jabalpur, (M.P.) Jabalpur (M.P.)

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 44A

…n/s by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court (also see para 4.2). No such decision, however, despite asking, stands brought to our notice by the parties, or otherwise found. The decision by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in B.S. Patel v. Dy. CIT [2010] 326 ITR 457 (MP), also noticed in Nikhil Mohine (supra), is not squarely on the point and, therefore, of no assistance to the Revenue. As regards the aspect of the retrospective nature of the Explanations under reference, we again find no difference in the view expressed in the impugned order/s, with that by the Tribunal in Nikhil Mohine (supra), i.e., per s…

Jasuja Enterprises Pvt.Ltd, Jabalpur vs. ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed

ITA 62/JAB/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur07 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora, Hon'Ble & Sh. Manomohan Das, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2018-19 Gujral Hotels Private Limited, Dy. Cit, Circle-2(1), Vs. Jabalpur, (M.P.) Jabalpur (M.P.)

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 44A

…n/s by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court (also see para 4.2). No such decision, however, despite asking, stands brought to our notice by the parties, or otherwise found. The decision by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in B.S. Patel v. Dy. CIT [2010] 326 ITR 457 (MP), also noticed in Nikhil Mohine (supra), is not squarely on the point and, therefore, of no assistance to the Revenue. As regards the aspect of the retrospective nature of the Explanations under reference, we again find no difference in the view expressed in the impugned order/s, with that by the Tribunal in Nikhil Mohine (supra), i.e., per s…

Mithila and Mithila Enterprise, New Delhi vs. Ward- 49(4), New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1906/DEL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Mar 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad, A N D Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia(Through Video Conferencing) आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A Nos. 1904, 1905 & 1906/Del/2021 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20 Mithila & Mithila Enterprises, Assessing Officer, C-22, New Krishna Park, बनाम Ward : 49 (4), Vikas Puri, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 018. Pan No. Aasfm1647F अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Pundir, Sr. D.RFor Respondent: 24/02/2022
Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(viia)Section 43B

…I.T.A.Nos. 1904 TO 1906/Del/2021 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH “E”NEW DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER, A N D SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Through Video Conferencing) आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A Nos. 1904, 1905 & 1906/Del/2021 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20 Mithila and Mithila Enterprises, Assessing Officer, C-22, New Krishna Park, बनाम Ward : 49 (4), Vikas Puri, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 018. PAN No. AASFM1647F अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Baldev Raj, C. A.; िनधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee by : Shri Gaurav Pundir, Sr. D.R.; रा…

Mithila and Mithila Enterprise, New Delhi vs. Ward- 49(4), New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1905/DEL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad, A N D Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia(Through Video Conferencing) आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A Nos. 1904, 1905 & 1906/Del/2021 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20 Mithila & Mithila Enterprises, Assessing Officer, C-22, New Krishna Park, बनाम Ward : 49 (4), Vikas Puri, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 018. Pan No. Aasfm1647F अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Pundir, Sr. D.RFor Respondent: 24/02/2022
Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(viia)Section 43B

…I.T.A.Nos. 1904 TO 1906/Del/2021 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH “E”NEW DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER, A N D SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Through Video Conferencing) आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A Nos. 1904, 1905 & 1906/Del/2021 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20 Mithila and Mithila Enterprises, Assessing Officer, C-22, New Krishna Park, बनाम Ward : 49 (4), Vikas Puri, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 018. PAN No. AASFM1647F अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Baldev Raj, C. A.; िनधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee by : Shri Gaurav Pundir, Sr. D.R.; रा…

Mithila and Mithila Enterprise, Delhi vs. Ward 49(4) Delhi, Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1904/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Mar 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad, A N D Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia(Through Video Conferencing) आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A Nos. 1904, 1905 & 1906/Del/2021 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20 Mithila & Mithila Enterprises, Assessing Officer, C-22, New Krishna Park, बनाम Ward : 49 (4), Vikas Puri, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 018. Pan No. Aasfm1647F अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Pundir, Sr. D.RFor Respondent: 24/02/2022
Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(viia)Section 43B

…I.T.A.Nos. 1904 TO 1906/Del/2021 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH “E”NEW DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER, A N D SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Through Video Conferencing) आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A Nos. 1904, 1905 & 1906/Del/2021 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20 Mithila and Mithila Enterprises, Assessing Officer, C-22, New Krishna Park, बनाम Ward : 49 (4), Vikas Puri, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 018. PAN No. AASFM1647F अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Baldev Raj, C. A.; िनधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee by : Shri Gaurav Pundir, Sr. D.R.; रा…

Amba Tech Engineering, Jaipur vs. ITO, Bhiwadi

In the result, the appeal of the assessees is allowed

ITA 243/JPR/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Mar 2022AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Rahish Mohammed (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT) a
Section 143(1)Section 2(24)Section 234BSection 36(1)(va)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR MkWa- ,l-lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 243/JP/2021 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2018-19 ITO/DCIT, cuke Amba Tech Engineering Shop No. 18, Plot No. D-819, Vs. CPC, RIICO Chowk Bhiwadi. Main Road Harchandpur Bhiwadi, Bhiwadi Tijara, Alwar-301019. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAWFA 2951 Q vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Asse…

Waidhan Engineering &Industries Pvt . Ltd Waidhan, Singrauli vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC Bangaluru, Bengaluru

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed

ITA 41/JAB/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur07 Mar 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon’Ble Accountnt Member & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Sukesh Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Halder, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 44A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JABALPUR BENCH, JABALPUR (Through web-based video conferencing platform) BEFORE SHRI SANJAY ARORA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTNT MEMBER & SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. Nos. 40 & 41/JAB/2021 (Asst. Years : 2018-19 & 2019-20) Waidhan Engineering and Vs. Dy. CIT, Bangalore. Industries Pvt. Ltd., Post Bag No. 17, Plot No. 54 & 56, Udyog Deep Industrial Area, P.O. Waidhan, Distt. Singrauli PAN: AAACW 4013A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sukesh Kumar, CA. Department by : Shri S.K. Halder, Sr. DR Date of hearing : 08/03/2022 Date of pronouncement : 10/03/…

Waidhan Engineering &Industries, Singrauli vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC Bengaluru, Bengaluru

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed

ITA 40/JAB/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur07 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon’Ble Accountnt Member & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Sukesh Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Halder, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 44A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JABALPUR BENCH, JABALPUR (Through web-based video conferencing platform) BEFORE SHRI SANJAY ARORA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTNT MEMBER & SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. Nos. 40 & 41/JAB/2021 (Asst. Years : 2018-19 & 2019-20) Waidhan Engineering and Vs. Dy. CIT, Bangalore. Industries Pvt. Ltd., Post Bag No. 17, Plot No. 54 & 56, Udyog Deep Industrial Area, P.O. Waidhan, Distt. Singrauli PAN: AAACW 4013A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sukesh Kumar, CA. Department by : Shri S.K. Halder, Sr. DR Date of hearing : 08/03/2022 Date of pronouncement : 10/03/…

Devi Shanker, Jaipur, Rajasthan vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore, Karnataka

In the result, all these appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 35/JPR/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur01 Mar 2022AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Surendra Shah (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal (Addl. CIT) a
Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Jh ,u-ds-lSuh] mik?;{k ,oa MkWa- ,l-lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI N.K. SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT & Dr. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 250/JP/2021 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2018-19 cuke Group Zero ITO 43, Everest Colony, Lal Kothi Tonk Road, Vs. Ward-6(2), Jaipur. Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAJFG 0698 K vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 310/JP/2021 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2019-20 cuke Karni Kehar Security Co-operati…

Karni Kehar Security Co-Operative Society Limited, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 1, Jaipur

In the result, all these appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 310/JPR/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur01 Mar 2022AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri Surendra Shah (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal (Addl. CIT) a
Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Jh ,u-ds-lSuh] mik?;{k ,oa MkWa- ,l-lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI N.K. SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT & Dr. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 250/JP/2021 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2018-19 cuke Group Zero ITO 43, Everest Colony, Lal Kothi Tonk Road, Vs. Ward-6(2), Jaipur. Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAJFG 0698 K vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 310/JP/2021 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2019-20 cuke Karni Kehar Security Co-operati…

Group Zero, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 6(2), Jaipur

In the result, all these appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 250/JPR/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur01 Mar 2022AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Surendra Shah (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal (Addl. CIT) a
Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Jh ,u-ds-lSuh] mik?;{k ,oa MkWa- ,l-lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI N.K. SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT & Dr. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 250/JP/2021 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2018-19 cuke Group Zero ITO 43, Everest Colony, Lal Kothi Tonk Road, Vs. Ward-6(2), Jaipur. Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAJFG 0698 K vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 310/JP/2021 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2019-20 cuke Karni Kehar Security Co-operati…

J.M.C Plywood, Goraya vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-3, Phagwara

In the result, the disallowances confirmed by the NFAC/CIT(A) related to ITA No

ITA 4/ASR/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Feb 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…contribution in relevant fund before the due date prescribed in Explanation to Section 36(1)(va), no deduction would be admissible even though he deposits the same before due date of ITR u/s 43B. (v) Hon’ble MP High Court in B.S. Patel vs. DCIT reported in 326 ITR 457 (MP) (vi) The decision of CIT vs. Alom Extrusions Ltd. The Hon’ble Supreme Court is not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case because Hon’ble Supreme Court has decided the issue in Alom Extrusions Ltd. case qua employer’s contribution as per Section 43B(b) of the Act and not employees contribution u/s 36(1 )(va) of the Act. (vii…

M/S Diamond Red Tanneries, Kapurthala vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1, Jalandhar

In the result, the disallowances confirmed by the NFAC/CIT(A) related to ITA No

ITA 21/ASR/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Feb 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…contribution in relevant fund before the due date prescribed in Explanation to Section 36(1)(va), no deduction would be admissible even though he deposits the same before due date of ITR u/s 43B. (v) Hon’ble MP High Court in B.S. Patel vs. DCIT reported in 326 ITR 457 (MP) (vi) The decision of CIT vs. Alom Extrusions Ltd. The Hon’ble Supreme Court is not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case because Hon’ble Supreme Court has decided the issue in Alom Extrusions Ltd. case qua employer’s contribution as per Section 43B(b) of the Act and not employees contribution u/s 36(1 )(va) of the Act. (vii…