Calcutta in CIT v. Vijay Shree Ltd.

43 Taxmann.com 396High Court2014#420 most cited

What is Calcutta in CIT v. Vijay Shree Ltd. authority for?

Employees' contribution to provident fund and ESI, if paid by the assessee before the due date for filing the return of income under section 139(1), is an allowable deduction under section 43B. No distinction is drawn between employer's and employee's contributions for the purpose of section 43B.

214

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. Vijay Shree Ltd. · 43 Taxmann.com 396 · Section 43B · Section 36(1)(va) · employees' contribution PF ESI · provident fund ESI deduction · payment before 139(1) due date · allowable deduction welfare funds · employer employee contribution · PF ESI payment income tax

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 234D

Issues it is cited on

section 2(24)(x)section 36(1)(va)section 2(24)section 43bsection 36(1)section 36section 43section 139(1)section 139section 13prescribedinterest

Judgments citing Calcutta in CIT v. Vijay Shree Ltd.

M/S Punniyamoorthy Pillai Department Store, Thanjavur vs. ITO, Circle(OSD)-1, Trichy

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 285/CHNY/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Jun 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Saroj Kumar Parida (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar (JCIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 263Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…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 Vijay Shree Ltd. (43 Taxmann.com 396; 06.09.2011). Thus, pre-dominant view of majority of Hon’ble High Court is in assessee’s favor wherein it was held that the Employees’ Contribution paid by the assessee before due date of furnishing of return of income u/s 139(1) would be an allowable deduction considering the provisions of Sec.43B. However, view against the assessee has b…

M/S Shreevim Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 2(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 327/KOL/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jun 2022AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No.327/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2020-21 M/S Shreevim Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd.…......................................……….……Appellant Room No.505, Todi Corner, 32, Ezra Street (South Block), Dalhousie - 700001. [Pan:Aancs8609M] Vs. Ito, Ward-2(1), Kolkata….……….…..…...............……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Sunil Surana, A/R, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 14, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 14, 2022

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member and Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member I.T.A. No.327/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2020-21 M/s Shreevim Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd.…......................................……….……Appellant Room No.505, Todi Corner, 32, Ezra Street (South Block), Dalhousie - 700001. [PAN:AANCS8609M] vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Kolkata….……….…..…...............……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances by: Shri Sunil Surana, A/R, appeared on behalf of the appellant. None appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : June 14, 2…

Online Computer & Services, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Durgapur

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

ITA 156/KOL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2019-20 Online Computer & Ito, Ward-1(1), Services Durgapur B-212, Bengal Shristi Vs. Complex, City Centre, Durgapur – 713 216. Pan: Aadfo 0585 B (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri Kausik K. Das, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 09.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.06.2022 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 10.08.2021 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. For That On The Facts Of The Case The Cit(A) Was Not Justified In Sustaining The Addition Of Rs. 1,27,428/- On Account Of Late Payment Of Pf & Esi When The Same Was Paid Within Time Allowed U/S 139(1) Of The Act & The Same May Be Please Be Allowed. 2. For That The Ao May Please Be Directed To Allow Credit Of Tds Of Rs. 18,591/- Relevant To The Year Under Appeal.”

For Appellant: NONEFor Respondent: Shri Kausik K. Das, SR. DR
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA BENCH “B(SMC)”, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SONJOY SARMA, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2019-20 ONLINE COMPUTER & ITO, WARD-1(1), SERVICES DURGAPUR B-212, Bengal Shristi Vs. Complex, City Centre, Durgapur – 713 216. PAN: AADFO 0585 B (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : NONE Respondent by : Shri Kausik K. Das, SR. DR Date of Hearing : 09.06.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 10.06.2022 O R D E R PER SONJOY SARMA, JM: The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 10.08.2021…

Palashbari Tea Company Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-1(3), Jalpaiguri

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 173/KOL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Jun 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No.173/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Palashbari Tea Company Limited....…......................................……….……Appellant Banarhat Jalpaiguri, Palashbari Tea Garden, Jalpaiguri-735202. [Pan:Aabcp8266F] Vs. Ito, Ward-1(3), Jalpaiguri……….…..…...............……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri N.S. Saini, A.R & Priyanka Salarpuria, A.R, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Biswanath Das, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 8, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 8, 2022

Section 139(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member and Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member I.T.A. No.173/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Palashbari Tea Company Limited....…......................................……….……Appellant Banarhat Jalpaiguri, Palashbari Tea Garden, Jalpaiguri-735202. [PAN:AABCP8266F] vs. ITO, Ward-1(3), Jalpaiguri……….…..…...............……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances by: Shri N.S. Saini, A.R and Priyanka Salarpuria, A.R, appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Biswanath Das, Addl. CIT, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date o…

M/S Baba Ispat Private Limited, Kolkata vs. CPC, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 577/KOL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Jun 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Bleita Nos.576 & 577/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2018-19 & 2019-20 M/S. Baba Ispat (P) Ltd. Dcit, Cpc, Bengaluru 2, Baretto Lane, 2Nd Floor, Vs. Room No. – 201, Kolkata – 700 069. Pan: Aaccb 4752 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate Respondent By : Shri Pradip Biswas, Acit Date Of Hearing : 26.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.06.2022 O R D E R Per Bench: These Two Appeals Are Preferred By The Assessee Against Two Separate Orders Passed By National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit’] Dated 16.11.2021 & 10.11.2021 Respectively. Since The Issue Involved Therein Is Common, The Same Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By A Single Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pradip Biswas, ACIT
Section 139(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA BENCH “B”, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SONJOY SARMA, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.576 & 577/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2018-19 & 2019-20 M/S. BABA ISPAT (P) Ltd. DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru 2, Baretto Lane, 2nd Floor, Vs. room No. – 201, Kolkata – 700 069. PAN: AACCB 4752 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Pradip Biswas, ACIT Date of Hearing : 26.05.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 06.06.2022 O R D E R PER BENCH: These two appeals are preferred by the assessee…

M/S Baba Ispat Private Limited, Kolkata vs. CPC, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 576/KOL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Jun 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Bleita Nos.576 & 577/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2018-19 & 2019-20 M/S. Baba Ispat (P) Ltd. Dcit, Cpc, Bengaluru 2, Baretto Lane, 2Nd Floor, Vs. Room No. – 201, Kolkata – 700 069. Pan: Aaccb 4752 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate Respondent By : Shri Pradip Biswas, Acit Date Of Hearing : 26.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.06.2022 O R D E R Per Bench: These Two Appeals Are Preferred By The Assessee Against Two Separate Orders Passed By National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit’] Dated 16.11.2021 & 10.11.2021 Respectively. Since The Issue Involved Therein Is Common, The Same Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By A Single Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pradip Biswas, ACIT
Section 139(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA BENCH “B”, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SONJOY SARMA, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.576 & 577/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2018-19 & 2019-20 M/S. BABA ISPAT (P) Ltd. DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru 2, Baretto Lane, 2nd Floor, Vs. room No. – 201, Kolkata – 700 069. PAN: AACCB 4752 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Pradip Biswas, ACIT Date of Hearing : 26.05.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 06.06.2022 O R D E R PER BENCH: These two appeals are preferred by the assessee…

Syama Prasad Mookerjee Port Trust, Kolkata vs. PCIT-5, Kolkata

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for AY 2015-16 is allowed and for AY 2016-17 is dismissed

ITA 170/KOL/2021[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata06 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Sri Manish Borad

Section 139(1)Section 244ASection 263Section 36(1)(va)Section 37

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘A’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before Sri Rajpal Yadav, Vice President & Sri Manish Borad, Accountant Member I.T.A. Nos.: 169 & 170/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17 Syma Prasad Mookerjee Port Trust..........................Appellant [PAN: AAAJK 0361 L] Vs. PCIT-5, Kolkata....................................................Respondent Appearances by: Sh. K. Meenatchi Sundaram, CA, appeared on behalf of the Assessee. Md. Ghayas Uddin, CIT(D/R), appeared on behalf of the Revenue. Date of concluding the hearing : March 23rd, 2022 Date of pronouncing the order : June 6th, 20…

Syama Prasad Mookerjee Port Trust, Kolkata vs. PCIT-5, Kolkata

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for AY 2015-16 is allowed and for AY 2016-17 is dismissed

ITA 169/KOL/2021[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata06 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Sri Manish Borad

Section 139(1)Section 244ASection 263Section 36(1)(va)Section 37

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘A’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before Sri Rajpal Yadav, Vice President & Sri Manish Borad, Accountant Member I.T.A. Nos.: 169 & 170/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17 Syma Prasad Mookerjee Port Trust..........................Appellant [PAN: AAAJK 0361 L] Vs. PCIT-5, Kolkata....................................................Respondent Appearances by: Sh. K. Meenatchi Sundaram, CA, appeared on behalf of the Assessee. Md. Ghayas Uddin, CIT(D/R), appeared on behalf of the Revenue. Date of concluding the hearing : March 23rd, 2022 Date of pronouncing the order : June 6th, 20…

Mohammed Qurban, Mecheda vs. ACIT, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 135/KOL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 May 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargi.T.A. No.135/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Mohammed Qurban..................................………….………………….……Appellant Shantipur, Mecheda, Kolaghat, District-East Medinipur, W.B.-721137. [Pan:Aabpq0008R] Vs. Adit, Cpc, Bengaluru……….…..…...............……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Ananda Sen, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 31, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 31, 2022

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member I.T.A. No.135/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Mohammed Qurban..................................………….………………….……Appellant Shantipur, Mecheda, Kolaghat, District-East Medinipur, W.B.-721137. [PAN:AABPQ0008R] vs. ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru……….…..…...............……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances by: Shri Ananda Sen, AR, appeared on behalf of the appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT-DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : May 31, 2022 Date of pronouncing the order : May 31, 202…

Unnati Writing Products Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 563/KOL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 May 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Ble] I.T.A. No. 563/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Unnati Writing Products Pvt. Ltd........................................................................................................Appellant 22, Buroshibtolla Main Road, Kolkata – 700 038. [Pan: Aaacu 9771 H] Vs Dcit, Cpc, Bengaluru ..................………………………………………......................................................Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Gautam Mondal, Acit Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 25, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 26, 2022

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH ‘B’ AT KOLKATA [BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI SONJOY SARMA, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER] I.T.A. No. 563/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Unnati Writing Products Pvt. Ltd........................................................................................................Appellant 22, Buroshibtolla Main Road, Kolkata – 700 038. [PAN: AAACU 9771 H] Vs DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru ..................………………………………………......................................................Respondent Appearances by: None appeared on behalf of the Assessee. Shri Gautam…

Beauty Impex (P) Ltd, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-9(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 541/KOL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 May 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2019-20 Beauty Impex Pvt. Ito, Ward-9(1), Kolkata Ltd. 21/5, Old Nimta Road, Vs. Barrackpur, North 24 Parganas – 700056. Pan: Aabcb 6201 C (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri Gautam Mondal, Acit Date Of Hearing : 25.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.05.2022 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 12.11.2021 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(Appeals) (Nfac) Has Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Passing An Order U/S 250 By Dismissing The Appeal Against Disallowance Of Sum Of Rs. 23,61,241/- Being Contribution Of Employees’ Share Towards Esi, Pf, Superannuation Fund Or Any Other Fund Set Up For The Welfare Of The Employee U/S 36(1)(Va) Read With Section 2(24)(X) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 When The Payments Were Made Within The Due Dates Of Filing Of Return U/S 139 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 & Hence Are Allowable. 2. For That The Appellant Craves Leave To Supplement, Cancel Or Otherwise Modify Any Of The Above Grounds Before Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Mondal, ACIT
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA BENCH “B”, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SONJOY SARMA, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2019-20 BEAUTY IMPEX PVT. ITO, Ward-9(1), Kolkata LTD. 21/5, Old Nimta Road, Vs. Barrackpur, North 24 Parganas – 700056. PAN: AABCB 6201 C (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : None Respondent by : Shri Gautam Mondal, ACIT Date of Hearing : 25.05.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 26.05.2022 O R D E R PER SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER: The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 12.11.2021 o…

M/S Saint-Gobain Indi Private Limited, Chennai vs. ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru

Appeal is allowed

ITA 241/CHNY/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 May 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Saroj Kumar Parida (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar (JCIT) – Ld. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…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 Vijay Shree Ltd. (43 Taxmann.com 396; 06.09.2011). Thus, pre-dominant view of majority of Hon’ble High Court is in assessee’s favor wherein it was held that the Employees’ Contribution paid by the assessee before due date of furnishing of return of income u/s 139(1) would be an allowable deduction considering the provisions of Sec.43B. However, view against the assessee has b…

M/S. Saint Gobain India Private Limited, Chennai vs. ADIT, CPC, Bangalore

Appeal is allowed

ITA 240/CHNY/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 May 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Saroj Kumar Parida (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar (JCIT) – Ld. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…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 Vijay Shree Ltd. (43 Taxmann.com 396; 06.09.2011). Thus, pre-dominant view of majority of Hon’ble High Court is in assessee’s favor wherein it was held that the Employees’ Contribution paid by the assessee before due date of furnishing of return of income u/s 139(1) would be an allowable deduction considering the provisions of Sec.43B. However, view against the assessee has b…

Sk Elecgtricals, Chennai vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore

Appeal is allowed

ITA 239/CHNY/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 May 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkata Raman (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar (JCIT) – Ld. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…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 Vijay Shree Ltd. (43 Taxmann.com 396; 06.09.2011). Thus, pre-dominant view of majority of Hon’ble High Court is in assessee’s favor wherein it was held that the Employees’ Contribution paid by the assessee before due date of furnishing of return of income u/s 139(1) would be an allowable deduction considering the provisions of Sec.43B. However, view against the assessee has b…

Amutha, Chennai vs. ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru

Appeal is allowed

ITA 238/CHNY/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 May 2022AY 2019-2020

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri B. Suresh (C.A) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar (JCIT) – Ld. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…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 Vijay Shree Ltd. (43 Taxmann.com 396; 06.09.2011). Thus, pre-dominant view of majority of Hon’ble High Court is in assessee’s favor wherein it was held that the Employees’ Contribution paid by the assessee before due date of furnishing of return of income u/s 139(1) would be an allowable deduction considering the provisions of Sec.43B. However, view against the assessee has b…

Anjappar Chettinad Ac Restaurant, Chennai vs. DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru

Appeal is allowed

ITA 224/CHNY/2022[2018-1]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 May 2022

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri V. Padmanaban (FCA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar (JCIT) – Ld. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…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 Vijay Shree Ltd. (43 Taxmann.com 396; 06.09.2011). Thus, pre-dominant view of majority of Hon’ble High Court is in assessee’s favor wherein it was held that the Employees’ Contribution paid by the assessee before due date of furnishing of return of income u/s 139(1) would be an allowable deduction considering the provisions of Sec.43B. However, view against the assessee has b…

R.P..Synthetics, Mumbai vs. DCIT CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 2264/MUM/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 May 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon'Ble Shri Sanjay Gargr.P. Synthetics The Dcit Plot No.. R.67, Midc Cpc, Bangalore, Thane Belapur Road, Vs. Karnataka-560500 Navi Mumbai-400 701 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No.Aaefr7566C Assessee By : Shri Vinay Devi, Ar Revenue By : Shri. Anil Gupta, Dr Date Of Hearing: 19.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.05.2022

For Appellant: Shri Vinay Devi, ARFor Respondent: Shri. Anil Gupta, DR
Section 139(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC-II” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER R.P. Synthetics The DCIT Plot NO.. R.67, MIDC CPC, Bangalore, Thane Belapur Road, Vs. Karnataka-560500 Navi Mumbai-400 701 (Respondent) (Appellant) PAN No.AAEFR7566C Assessee by : Shri Vinay Devi, AR Revenue by : Shri. Anil Gupta, DR Date of hearing: 19.05.2022 Date of pronouncement : 19.05.2022 O R D E R 01. The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 06.10.2021 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] passed u/s 250 of the Income Ta…

Asm Marketing Private Limited, Chennai vs. Aoc.Circle 1(1), Chennai

Appeal is allowed

ITA 144/CHNY/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 May 2022AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri G. Ganesh Babu (FCA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri ARV Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…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 Vijay Shree Ltd. (43 Taxmann.com 396; 06.09.2011). Thus, pre-dominant view of majority of Hon’ble High Court is in assessee’s favor wherein it was held that the Employees’ Contribution paid by the assessee before due date of furnishing of return of income u/s 139(1) would be an allowable deduction considering the provisions of Sec.43B. However, view against the assessee has b…

Asm Marketing Private Limited, Chennai vs. Aoc.Circle 1(1), Chennai

Appeal is allowed

ITA 143/CHNY/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 May 2022AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Shri G. Ganesh Babu (FCA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri ARV Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…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 Vijay Shree Ltd. (43 Taxmann.com 396; 06.09.2011). Thus, pre-dominant view of majority of Hon’ble High Court is in assessee’s favor wherein it was held that the Employees’ Contribution paid by the assessee before due date of furnishing of return of income u/s 139(1) would be an allowable deduction considering the provisions of Sec.43B. However, view against the assessee has b…

C R Textile Mills, Athanoor vs. Pr.Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Coimbatore

Appeal is allowed

ITA 54/CHNY/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Apr 2022AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar (JCIT) – Ld. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 263Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…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 Vijay Shree Ltd. (43 Taxmann.com 396; 06.09.2011). Thus, pre-dominant view of majority of Hon’ble High Court is in assessee’s favor wherein it was held that the Employees’ Contribution paid by the assessee before due date of furnishing of return of income u/s 139(1) would be an allowable deduction considering the provisions of Sec.43B. However, view against the assessee has b…