Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Bombay in CIT v. Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 36(1)(va), Section 143(3), Section 2(24)(x), Section 250, Section 271(1)(c), Section 43B.

Bombay in CIT v. Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd.

Q: How many judgments cite Bombay in CIT v. Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd.?

160 judgments on BharatTax cite Bombay in CIT v. Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd. (53 Taxmann.com 141), spanning 2017 to 2025.

53 Taxmann.com 141High Court2015#615 most cited

What is Bombay in CIT v. Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd. authority for?

The Bombay High Court holds that employees' contributions to provident fund and ESIC, though paid beyond the due dates specified in the respective welfare legislations, are allowable as a deduction under section 36(1)(va) if they are paid before the due date for furnishing the return of income under section 139(1) of the Income-tax Act.

160

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd. · 53 Taxmann.com 141 · Section 36(1)(va) · employees contribution to PF and ESIC · late payment of provident fund · deduction of employees contribution · due date for filing return of income · Section 139(1) · Section 2(24)(x) · Section 43B · allowability of deduction · Bombay High Court

Sections most often in play

Section 36(1)(va)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250 Section 271(1)(c)Section 43B Section 132 Section 139(1)

Issues it is cited on

section 36(va)section 34(1)(iv)section 143(1)(a)(iv)section 34(1)employees contribution to pf section 2(24)(x)section 36(1)(va)section 36(1)(iv)section 43b section 2(24)section 36(1)section 43

Judgments citing Bombay in CIT v. Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd.

M/S. P.A.Zaveri, Mumbai vs. ADIT, CPC, Begaluru

The appeals are dismissed

ITA 2057/MUM/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Bhadresh DoshiFor Respondent: Ms. Naina K. Kumar

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 254Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "SMC" BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & M/s P A Zaveri Shop No. 5, Bldg. No.73, Central Avenue Road, Chembur (East), Mumbai - 400071 [PAN: AAAFP1089L] …………… Appellant Vs DCIT CPC-Bangalore, Centralized Processing Centre, Income Tax Department, Respondent ……………. Bengaluru - 560500 Odex India Solutions Private Limited, Office No. 901-906, 9th Floor, Kailash Corporate Lounge, Godrej, Hiranandani Link Road, Vikhroli (West), Mumbai - 400075 [PAN: AACC01921B] …………… Appellant Vs Commissioner of Income-tax, National Faceless Ap…

Principle Security and Allied Services Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Circle 13(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 280/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhprinciple Security & Vs. Circle 13(1)(2) Allied Services Private Aayakar Bhavan, Ground Limited, 707 Hubtown Floor, M.K. Road, Viva Shankar Wadi, New Marine Lines Western Express Mumbai – 400 020 Highway, Jogeshwari (East) Mumbai – 400060 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aafcp2691A Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Rahul K. Hakani Respondent By : V.S. Mahajan Date Of Hearing 18.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 21.04.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): The Present Appeal Filed By The Assesse Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Nfac, Delhi Dated 29.12.2022 For A.Y. 2018-19. The Assesse Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us: “1. The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Not Appreciating The Fact That The Intimation Issued By The Id Ao Cpc Bangalore W'S 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Is Erroneous / Without Jurisdiction Since Additions On Issues Where Two Views Are Possible Cannot Be Made. 2. The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming Addition Of Rs.1,59,10,546/- U/S 36(1)(Va) Of The Act Without Appreciating The Fact That The Employees Contribution To Pf & Esic Was Deposited Before The Due Date Of Filing Of Return. 3. The Appellant Prays That The Adjustment Made In The Intimation Order U/S143(1) Of The Act May Be Deleted.

For Appellant: Rahul K. HakaniFor Respondent: V.S. Mahajan

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

…P a g e | 1 Principle Security and Allied Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Circle 13(1)(2) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Principle Security and Vs. Circle 13(1)(2) Allied Services Private Aayakar Bhavan, Ground Limited, 707 Hubtown Floor, M.K. Road, Viva Shankar Wadi, New Marine Lines Western Express Mumbai – 400 020 Highway, Jogeshwari (East) Mumbai – 400060 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AAFCP2691A Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Rahul K. Hakani Respondent by : V.S. Mahajan Date of Hearing 18.04…

Shriniwas Mishra, Mumbai vs. Dy.CIT CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 2336/MUM/2021[2018-19`]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Apr 2023

Bench: Shir Pavan Kumar Gadaleshriniwas Mishra Vs. Dcit, Cpc C/O. Mr. Jp Mishra, Bangalore-560500. 46/12, New A.B Nagar South, Unnao, Uttar Pradesh – 209801 Pan/Gir No. : Agipm2309L Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Mr. Nitesh Thakkar.Ar Respondent By : Ms. Jayashree Thakur.Dr Date Of Hearing 24.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 25.04.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/Cit(A) Passed U/Sec 143(1) & 250 Of The Act.

For Appellant: Mr. Nitesh Thakkar.ARFor Respondent: Ms. Jayashree Thakur.DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(iva)Section 43Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHIR PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Shriniwas Mishra Vs. DCIT, CPC C/o. Mr. JP Mishra, Bangalore-560500. 46/12, New A.B Nagar South, Unnao, Uttar Pradesh – 209801 PAN/GIR No. : AGIPM2309L Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Mr. Nitesh Thakkar.AR Respondent by : Ms. Jayashree Thakur.DR Date of Hearing 24.04.2023 Date of Pronouncement 25.04.2023 आदेश / O R D E R PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE JM: The appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi/CIT(A) passed U/sec 143(1) and 250 of the Act.…

M/S. Geekay Securities Services Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 3(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 1842/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Apr 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhm/S Geekay Securities Vs. Dy. Cit, Circle-3(1)(1) Services Private Limited 6Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, G-11, Tulsani Chambers, M.K. Marg, Free Press Journal Marg Mumbai- 400020 Nariman Point, Maharashtra – 400021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaccg1282D Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri Gyaneshwar Kataram Respondent By : Smt. Anne Varghese Date Of Hearing 17.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 17.04.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): The Present Appeal Filed By The Assesse Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Nfac, Delhi Dated 08.09.2021 For A.Y. 2017-18. The Assesse Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us: “1. In The Circumstances & Facts Of Our Case, The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Confirming The Action Of Ld. Dcit, Cpc In Upholding Disallowance Of Rs.1,21,39,702/- U/S 36(1)(Va) Despite The Fact That The Said Amount Of Rs1,21,39,702/- Comprises Of Two Components, An Amount Of Rs.64,43,502/- Which Pertains To Employer'S Contribution To Provident Fund/Lwf & An Amount Of Rs.56,96,200/- Which Pertains To Employee'S Contribution To Provident Fund / Lwf & Not Considering The Conclusive Evidence Submitted In Its Written Submission & Supporting Paper Book 2.. In The Circumstances & Facts Of Our Case, The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Confirming The Action Of Ld Dcit, Cpc In Upholding Disallowance Of Rs. 56,96,200/-

For Appellant: Shri Gyaneshwar KataramFor Respondent: Smt. Anne Varghese

Section 36(1)(va)Section 438Section 43B

…P a g e | 1 M/s Geekay Securities Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dy.CIT, Circle-3(1)(1) THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M/s Geekay Securities Vs. Dy. CIT, Circle-3(1)(1) Services Private Limited 6th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, G-11, Tulsani Chambers, M.K. Marg, Free Press Journal Marg Mumbai- 400020 Nariman Point, Maharashtra – 400021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AACCG1282D Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Shri Gyaneshwar Kataram Respondent by : Smt. Anne Varghese Date of Hearing 17.04.2023 Date of Pronoun…

Aegis Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax Circle 6(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 717/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalaegis Ltd. Essar House, 11, K. K. Marg, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai –400034 Pan – Aaace8354Q ……………. Appellant Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle–6(1)(1), Mumbai ……………. Respondent Assessee By: Shri Rajan R. Vora Revenue By: Dr. Yogesh Kamath Date Of Hearing: 10/10/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 06/01/2023 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M. 1. This Appeal By The Appellant Is Against The Assessment Order Dated 25Th February 2022 Passed By The National Faceless Assessment Centre For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “General 1. Erred In Determining The Total Taxable Income Of The Appellant For Ay 2017-18 At Inr 40,44,64,087 As Against Returned Income Of Inr 12,36,48,010 As Reported In The Return Of Income Filed By The Appellant. Part I - Transfer Pricing Adjustments

For Appellant: Shri Rajan R. VoraFor Respondent: Dr. Yogesh Kamath

Section 234DSection 244ASection 271ASection 36(1)(va)Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “K”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Aegis Ltd. Essar House, 11, K. K. Marg, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai –400034 PAN – AAACE8354Q ……………. Appellant VS. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle–6(1)(1), Mumbai ……………. Respondent Assessee by: Shri Rajan R. Vora Revenue by: Dr. Yogesh Kamath Date of Hearing: 10/10/2022 Date of Pronouncement: 06/01/2023 ORDER PER GAGAN GOYAL, A.M. 1. This appeal by the Appellant is against the assessment order dated 25th February 2022 passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre for the…

M/S. Suresh Electricals, Bellary vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 724/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanassessment Year : 2018-19 M/S. Suresh Electricals, Vs. Dcit, Ward No.25, Cmc T. S. No.227, Tilak Cpc, Nagar, Khb Colony, Bengaluru. Bellary – 583 101. Pan : Abyfs 9751 M Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. B. S. Balachandran, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel Date Of Hearing : 23.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.11.2022 O R D E R This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Nfac, Delhi, Dated 12.07.2022, Relating To Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Only Issue That Arises For Consideration In This Appeal Is As To Whether The Revenue Authorities Were Justified In Disallowing Payment Made To Esi/Pf Being Employees’ Share Of Contribution Under Section 36(1)(Va) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’). 3. In This Regard, It Is Pertinent To Note That The Employee Provident Fund & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 Was Promulgated To Provide For Such Institution Of Provident Funds, Pension Fund & Deposit-Linked Insurance Fund For Employees In Factories & Other Establishments. It Aims To Build Adequate Retirement Corpus For The Salaried Class Of Employees. The Fund Includes Contributions From The Employer & Employee Both, Page 2 Of 14

For Appellant: Shri. B. S. Balachandran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel

Section 2Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC - C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N. V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT Assessment Year : 2018-19 M/s. Suresh Electricals, Vs. DCIT, Ward No.25, CMC T. S. No.227, Tilak CPC, Nagar, KHB Colony, Bengaluru. Bellary – 583 101. PAN : ABYFS 9751 M APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. B. S. Balachandran, Advocate Revenue by : Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel Date of hearing : 23.11.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 24.11.2022 O R D E R This is an appeal by the assessee directed against the order of NFAC, Delhi, dated 12.07.2022, relating to Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The only…

Bhoruka Fabcons Private Limited, Mysuru vs. The Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 910/BANG/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Nov 2022AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanassessment Year : 2020-21 M/S. Bhoruka Fabcons Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Director Of Income Tax, No.427E, Hebbal Industrial Area, Cpc, Mysuru – 570 016. Bengaluru. Pan : Aaccb 9377 N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Bhargava S. N, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel Date Of Hearing : 23.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.11.2022 O R D E R This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Nfac, Delhi, Dated 28.07.2022, Relating To Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. The Only Issue That Arises For Consideration In This Appeal Is As To Whether The Revenue Authorities Were Justified In Disallowing Payment Made To Esi/Pf Being Employees’ Share Of Contribution Under Section 36(1)(Va) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’). 3. In This Regard, It Is Pertinent To Note That The Employee Provident Fund & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 Was Promulgated To Provide For Such Institution Of Provident Funds, Pension Fund & Deposit-Linked Insurance Fund For Employees In Factories & Other Establishments. It Aims To Build Adequate Retirement Corpus For The Salaried Class Of Employees. The Fund Includes Contributions From The Employer & Employee Both, Calculated In The Prescribed Manner Under The Relevant Act. As Per Page 2 Of 13

For Appellant: Shri. Bhargava S. N, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel

Section 2Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC - C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N. V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT Assessment Year : 2020-21 M/s. Bhoruka Fabcons Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Director of Income Tax, No.427E, Hebbal Industrial Area, CPC, Mysuru – 570 016. Bengaluru. PAN : AACCB 9377 N APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. Bhargava S. N, CA Revenue by : Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel Date of hearing : 23.11.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 24.11.2022 O R D E R This is an appeal by the assessee directed against the order of NFAC, Delhi, dated 28.07.2022, relating to Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. The…

Chase Security, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(3)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 796/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanassessment Year : 2018-19 M/S. Chase Security, Vs. The Ito, No.16/A, 1St Floor, Millar Tank Bund Ward – 6(3)(1), Cpc, Road, Vasanth Nagar, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 052. Pan : Aaefc 2412 L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Smt. Sheethal Borkar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel Date Of Hearing : 21.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.11.2022 O R D E R This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Dated 29.04.2021 By The Nfac, Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Only Issue That Arises For Consideration In This Appeal Is As To Whether The Revenue Authorities Were Justified In Disallowing Payment Made To Esi/Pf Being Employees’ Share Of Contribution Under Section 36(1)(Va) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’). 3. In This Regard, It Is Pertinent To Note That The Employee Provident Fund & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 Was Promulgated To Provide For Such Institution Of Provident Funds, Pension Fund & Deposit-Linked Insurance Fund For Employees In Factories & Other Establishments. It Aims To Build Adequate Retirement Corpus For The Salaried Class Of Employees. The Fund Includes Contributions From The Employer & Employee Both, Page 2 Of 14

For Appellant: Smt. Sheethal Borkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel

Section 2Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC - C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N. V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT Assessment Year : 2018-19 M/s. Chase Security, Vs. The ITO, No.16/A, 1st Floor, Millar Tank Bund Ward – 6(3)(1), CPC, Road, Vasanth Nagar, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 052. PAN : AAEFC 2412 L APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Smt. Sheethal Borkar, Advocate Revenue by : Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel Date of hearing : 21.11.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 23.11.2022 O R D E R This is an appeal by the assessee directed against the order dated 29.04.2021 by the NFAC, Delhi relating to Assessment Year 201…

M/S, Madras Hydraulic Hose Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. DCIT, Corporate Circle-4(1), Chennai

Appeal is allowed

ITA 702/CHNY/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2022AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singhand Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri. Saroj Kumar Parida (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR

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

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ‘ए’ "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय +ी महावीर िसंह, उपा12 एवं माननीय+ी मनोज कुमार अ6वाल ,लेखा सद9 के सम2। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.702/Chny/2022 (िनधाBरणवषB / Assessment Year: 2020-21) M/s. Madras Hydraulic Hose Pvt. Ltd. DCIT बनाम/ Flat No. 5, Harrington Apartments, Corporate Circle -4(1), No. 211, 98, Harrington Road, Vs. Chennai. Chetpet, Chennai – 600 031. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AAACM-4367-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे…

Late Mr.Seshadri Naidu Dharmaraj Rep by Legal Heir - Mr.Shankar Ganesh, Chennai vs. CPC, Bangalore

Appeal is allowed

ITA 661/CHNY/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2022AY 2019-2020

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singhand Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR

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

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ‘ए’ "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय +ी महावीर िसंह, उपा12 एवं माननीय +ी मनोज कुमार अ6वाल ,लेखा सद9 के सम2। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.660/Chny/2022 (िनधाBरणवषB / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.661/Chny/2022 (िनधाBरणवषB / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Late Mr. Seshadri Naidu Dharmaraj DCIT बनाम/ Rep. by Mr. Shankar Ganesh CPC, No. 10, 2nd Street,Ulaganathapuram, Bangalore. Vs. Ennore, Chennai – 600 057. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AECPD-3635-A (अप…

Late Mr.Seshadri Naidu Dharmaraj Rep by Legal Heir - Mr.Shankar Ganesh, Chennai vs. CPC, Bangalore

Appeal is allowed

ITA 660/CHNY/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2022AY 2018-2019

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singhand Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR

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

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ‘ए’ "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय +ी महावीर िसंह, उपा12 एवं माननीय +ी मनोज कुमार अ6वाल ,लेखा सद9 के सम2। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.660/Chny/2022 (िनधाBरणवषB / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.661/Chny/2022 (िनधाBरणवषB / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Late Mr. Seshadri Naidu Dharmaraj DCIT बनाम/ Rep. by Mr. Shankar Ganesh CPC, No. 10, 2nd Street,Ulaganathapuram, Bangalore. Vs. Ennore, Chennai – 600 057. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AECPD-3635-A (अप…

Allwyn Joseph Sequeira, Mumbai vs. CPC Income Tax Dept., Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed in above terms

ITA 2049/MUM/2021[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Gagan Goyal, Am

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha

Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 438Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JM & SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, AM I.T.A. No. 2049/Mum/2021 (Assessment Year: 2019-20) Shri Allwyn Joseph Sequeira, ACIT Cir-4(3)(1), 401, 4th floor, Fair Field Apartment, Room No. 349, 3rd Floor, बनाम/ Malad (West) G-Block, Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra Vs. Mumbai-400 064. Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400 051. स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ PAN No. AAVPS3288D (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant by : None प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent by : Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तायीख / : 07/07/2023 Date…

Jyoti International Foods Pvt. Ltd, Pune vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -6, Pune

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 649/PUN/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

For Appellant: Shri Hari KrishanFor Respondent: Shri Hitendra B. Ninawe

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 263Section 36(1)(vi)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 649/PUN/2020 : A.Y. 2015-16 M/s. Jyoti International Foods Pvt. Ltd., North Court Building, North Avenue Road, Kalyani Nagar, PUNE – 411 006 PAN: AADCJ 1224D Appellant Vs. The Pr. Commissioner of Income-tax-6 Pune Respondent Appellant by : Shri Hari Krishan Respondent by : Shri Hitendra B. Ninawe Date of Hearing : 24-08-2022 Date of Pronouncement : 25-08-2022 ORDER PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER This appeal preferred by the assessee emana…

Mansoor Aiyaz Ebrahim, Chennai vs. Assistant Dirctor of Incometax, CPC, Bangalore

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 622/CHNY/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Aug 2022AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Sonjoy Sarma

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Narayanan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. M.S. Deeeptha (JCIT) –Ld. DR

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

…milar view favorable to assessee has been taken by Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in Spectrum Consultants India Pvt. Ltd. V/s CIT (49 Taxmann.com ITA Nos.621 & 622/Chny/2022 29; 09.12.2013); Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in CIT V/s Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd. (53 Taxmann.com 141; 14.10.2014); Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT V/s Aimil Ltd. (188 Taxman 265 23.12.2009); Hon’ble Patna High Court in the case of Bihar State Warehousing Corp. Ltd. (88 Taxmann.com 455; 16.03.2016); Hon’ble High Court of Uttarakhand in CIT V/s Kicha Sugar Co. Ltd. (35 Taxmann.com 54; 20.05.2013); Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in CIT V/s V…

Mansoor Aiyaz Ebrahim, Chennai vs. Assistant Dirctor of Incometax, CPC, Bangalore

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 621/CHNY/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Aug 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Sonjoy Sarma

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Narayanan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. M.S. Deeeptha (JCIT) –Ld. DR

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

Tonglit Autogistic Private Limited, Chennai vs. Asst Director of It, CPC Income Tax Department, Banglore

Appeal is allowed

ITA 566/CHNY/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Aug 2022AY 2018-2019

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Sonjoy Sarma

For Appellant: Shri Ganesh. S (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. M.S. Deeeptha (JCIT) –Ld. DR

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

…y Hon’ble Apex Court. 9. A similar view favorable to assessee has been taken by Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in Spectrum Consultants India Pvt. Ltd. V/s CIT (49 Taxmann.com 29; 09.12.2013); Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in CIT V/s Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd. (53 Taxmann.com 141; 14.10.2014); Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT V/s Aimil Ltd. (188 Taxman 265 23.12.2009); Hon’ble Patna High Court in the case of Bihar State Warehousing Corp. Ltd. (88 Taxmann.com 455; 16.03.2016); Hon’ble High Court of Uttarakhand in CIT V/s Kicha Sugar Co. Ltd. (35 Taxmann.com 54; 20.05.2013); Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in CIT V/s V…

The Malad Sahakari Bank Ltd, Mumbai vs. NFAC, Delhi

In the result, the present appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 61/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Aug 2022AY 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Ms. Tejasvi PatilFor Respondent: Shri B.K. Bagchi

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "E" BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER The Malad Sahakari Bank Limited, 6, Sujata Niketan, Rani Sati Marg, Malad (East), Mumbai - 400097 [PAN: AAAAT0320R] ……………… Appellant Vs National Faceless Appeal Centre, …………….… Respondent Delhi Appearances For the Appellant/Assessee : Shri Ms. Tejasvi Patil For the Respondent/Department : Shri B.K. Bagchi Date of conclusion of hearing : 12.05.2022 Date of pronouncement of order : 04.08.2022 O R D E R Per Rahul Chaudhary, Judicial Member: 1. By way of the present appeal the Ap…

The Estate Investment Company Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 2(1) (2), Mumbai

In the result, the present appeal is allowed

ITA 2426/MUM/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jul 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: The Due Date Of Filing Income Tax Return Prescribed Under Section 139(1) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj K. JainFor Respondent: Shri B.K. Bagchi

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "E" BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER The Estate Investment Company Pvt. Ltd., 4th Floor, 139, Seksaria Chambers, Nagindas Master Road, Fort, Mumbai - 400001 [PAN: AAACE2566J] ……………… Appellant Vs ACIT 2(1)(2), Mumbai, Aaykar Bhavan, M G Road, Mumbai - 400020 …………….… Respondent Appearances For the Appellant/Assessee : Shri Pankaj K. Jain For the Respondent/Department : Shri B.K. Bagchi Date of conclusion of hearing : 11.05.2022 Date of pronouncement of order : 28.07.2022 O R D E R Per Rahul Chaudhary, Judicial Mem…

Samosaran Yarns Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the present appeal is allowed

ITA 2111/MUM/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jul 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: The Due Date Of Filing Income Tax Return Prescribed Under Section 139(1) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri M.B. SanghviFor Respondent: Shri Hoshang B. Irani

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "G" BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Samosaran Yarns Pvt. Ltd., 42/42, 2nd Floor, Liberty Building, Sir Vithaldas Thakersey Marg, New Marine Lines, Mumbai - 400020 [PAN:AAJCS6707Q] ……………… Appellant Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 1(3)(1), Aayakar Bhawan, …………….… Respondent Mumbai - 400020 Appearances For the Appellant/Assessee : Shri M.B. Sanghvi For the Respondent/Department : Shri Hoshang B. Irani Date of conclusion of hearing : 05.05.2022 Date of pronouncement of order : 28.07.2022 O R D E R…

Mafatlal Industries Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT-6(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 4369/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Arati Vissanji &For Respondent: Nimesh Yadav

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.NO. 6963/MUM/2012 (A.Y. 2007-08) M/s. Mafatlal Industries Limited v. Addl. CIT – 6(3) Mafatlal House, Backbay Reclamation Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road H.T. Parekh Marg, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400020 PAN: AAACM2813L (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA.NO. 4369/MUM/2013 (A.Y. 2008-09) M/s. Mafatlal Industries Limited v. Addl. CIT – 6(3) Kaledonia, Office No.3 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road 6th Floor, Sahar Road Mumbai - 400020 Andheri (E), Mumbai - 400069 PAN: AAACM2…