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 Imperial Granites Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 104/CHNY/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

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

Section 139(1)Section 253(4)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…

M/S Gbr Minerals Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. Income Tax Officer, Corporate Ward2(2), Chennai

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 103/CHNY/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Apr 2022AY 2018-19
Section 139(1)Section 253(4)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 Rane Brake Lining Limited, Chennai vs. ADIT, CPC, Banglore

The appeals stand partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 101/CHNY/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Saroj Kumar Parida (Advocate) -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 43BSection 44A

…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…

Amazing Export Corporation, Palladam vs. DCIT, CPC, Benguluru

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 100/CHNY/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Apr 2022AY 2018-19
Section 139(1)Section 253(4)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…

Effluent & Water Treatment Engineers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Cir.11(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 70/KOL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. Nos.69 & 70/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Effluent & Water Treatment Engineers Pvt. Ltd........................................................Appellant P-22, 10Th Floor, Cit Road, Entally, Kolkata – 700014. [Pan: Aaace5484B] Vs. Dcit, Circle-11(1), Kolkata…...............……........……...…..…...............................Respondent Appearances By: Shri Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 31, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 31, 2022

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member and Shri Girish Agrawal, Accountant Member I.T.A. Nos.69 & 70/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Effluent & Water Treatment Engineers Pvt. Ltd........................................................Appellant P-22, 10th Floor, CIT Road, Entally, Kolkata – 700014. [PAN: AAACE5484B] vs. DCIT, Circle-11(1), Kolkata…...............……........……...…..…...............................Respondent Appearances by: Shri Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate appeared on behalf of the Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT-DR, appeare…

Effluent & Water Treatment Engineers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Cir.11(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 69/KOL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Mar 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. Nos.69 & 70/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Effluent & Water Treatment Engineers Pvt. Ltd........................................................Appellant P-22, 10Th Floor, Cit Road, Entally, Kolkata – 700014. [Pan: Aaace5484B] Vs. Dcit, Circle-11(1), Kolkata…...............……........……...…..…...............................Respondent Appearances By: Shri Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 31, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 31, 2022

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member and Shri Girish Agrawal, Accountant Member I.T.A. Nos.69 & 70/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Effluent & Water Treatment Engineers Pvt. Ltd........................................................Appellant P-22, 10th Floor, CIT Road, Entally, Kolkata – 700014. [PAN: AAACE5484B] vs. DCIT, Circle-11(1), Kolkata…...............……........……...…..…...............................Respondent Appearances by: Shri Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate appeared on behalf of the Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT-DR, appeare…

M/S Ind Synergy Limited, Raipur (Cg) vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax 1(2), Raipur (Cg)

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 312/BIL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur30 Mar 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 312/Rpr/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Ind Synergy Limited Gokul Puram, Kachna Road, Khamardih, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aaaci7072D .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-1(2), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Abhishek Mahawar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Shravankumar Meena, Dr

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Mahawar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Shravankumar Meena, DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(24)(x)Section 3Section 36(1)(va)

…Foundary Pvt. Ltd Vs. CIT 145 DTR 265 (All) e. CIT Vs. Mark Auto Industries (2008) 358 ITR 43 (P&H) f. CIt Vs. Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd (2014) 363 ITR 307 (Raj) g. EssaeTeraoka Pvt. Ltd Vs. DCIT (2014)366 ITR 408 (Kar) h. CIT Vs. Vijay Shree Ltd (2014) 43 Taxmann.com 396 (Cal) i. CIT Vs. Kichha Sugar Co Ltd (2013) 356 ITR 351 (Uttarakhand) In the backdrop of the aforesaid settled position of law, we are of the considered view that no distinction is to be drawn between the employers as well as employees contribution to PF and ESI, as both are covered u/s 43B of the Act. 11. Before parting qua the aforesaid…

Kalyan Mukherjee, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Range-2, Asansol

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 107/KOL/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No.107/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Kalyan Mukherjee..............……………………....................……….……Appellant Alaktika Housing Estate, 2C/602, Rajarhat, Kolkat-700156. [Pan: Adzpm2292C] Vs. Dcit, Range-2, Asansol.......…..….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 30, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 30, 2022

Section 250Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member and Shri Girish Agrawal, Accountant Member I.T.A. No.107/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Kalyan Mukherjee..............……………………....................……….……Appellant Alaktika Housing Estate, 2C/602, Rajarhat, Kolkat-700156. [PAN: ADZPM2292C] vs. DCIT, Range-2, Asansol.......…..….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances by: None appeared on behalf of the appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT-DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : March 30, 2022 Date of pronouncing th…

Mindrill Systems and Solutions (P) Ltd, Howrah vs. DCIT, Cir. 1(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 603/KOL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Mar 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No.603/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2019-20 M/S. Mindrill Systems & Solutions Pvt. Ltd............................................................Appellant Nh-6, Biparnapara, Near Saraswati Bridge, Domjur Mahiary Road, Dompur, P.O. Begri, Howrah-711411. [Pan: Aaecm3065G] Vs. Dcit, Circle-1(1), Kolkata….…..…...............……........……...…..…......................Respondent Appearances By: Shri Shri P.K. Himmatsingka, Ca Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 08, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 08, 2022

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member and Shri Girish Agrawal, Accountant Member I.T.A. No.603/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2019-20 M/s. Mindrill Systems And Solutions Pvt. Ltd............................................................Appellant NH-6, Biparnapara, Near Saraswati Bridge, Domjur Mahiary Road, Dompur, P.O. Begri, Howrah-711411. [PAN: AAECM3065G] vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Kolkata….…..…...............……........……...…..…......................Respondent Appearances by: Shri Shri P.K. Himmatsingka, CA appeared on behalf of the Appellant. Smt. Ranu Bis…

Prakash Steet Products Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 579/KOL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Mar 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No.579/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2019-20 M/S. Prakash Steel Products Pvt. Ltd...................................................………Appellant 46C, Chowringhee Road, Flat 14G, Kolkata – 700071. [Pan: Aabcp5269J] Vs. Cpc, Bangalore…...............……........……...…..…........................................Respondent Appearances By: Shri Shri Chirag Desai, Ar Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 08, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 08, 2022

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member and Shri Girish Agrawal, Accountant Member I.T.A. No.579/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2019-20 M/s. Prakash Steel Products Pvt. Ltd...................................................………Appellant 46C, Chowringhee Road, Flat 14G, Kolkata – 700071. [PAN: AABCP5269J] vs. CPC, Bangalore…...............……........……...…..…........................................Respondent Appearances by: Shri Shri Chirag Desai, AR appeared on behalf of the appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT-DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of…

Soltex Insolation P. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 7(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1/KOL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Sri Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma)

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA [Virtual Court] (Before Sri Manish Borad, Accountant Member & Sri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member) I.T.A. No.: 01/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Soltek Insolation P. Ltd..........................................................Appellant [PAN: AATCS 0007 M] Vs. ITO, Ward-7(1), Kolkata.......................................................Respondent Appearances by: Sh. Somnath Ghosh, Adv., appeared on behalf of the Assessee. Sh. Surendra Kumar Mishra, Addl. CIT, appeared on behalf of the Revenue. Date of concluding the hearing : February 16th, 2022…

Vaaho Agencies Private Limited, Amritsar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward -1 ( 1 ), Amritsar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee related all grounds of ITA No

ITA 30/ASR/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar02 Mar 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meenash. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Jatinder Arora (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Satbir Singh, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…Foundary Pvt. Ltd Vs. CIT 145 DTR 265 (All) e. CIT Vs. Mark Auto Industries (2008) 358 ITR 43 (P&H) f. CIt Vs. Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd (2014) 363 ITR 307 (Raj) g. Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd Vs. DCIT (2014)366 ITR 408 (Kar) h. CIT Vs. Vijay Shree Ltd (2014) 43 Taxmann.com 396 (Cal) i. CIT Vs. Kichha Sugar Co Ltd (2013) 356 ITR 351 (Uttarakhand) In the backdrop of the aforesaid settled position of law, we are of the considered view that the no distinction is to be drawn between the employers as well as employees contribution to PF and ESI as both are covered u/s 43B of the Act. 7. Now, we shall take up the claim…

Saha Textile, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir.-50(1) (2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 402/KOL/2021[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata02 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No.402/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Saha Textile............................................................…………………….……Appellant 29, Saha Textile, K B Bose Road, Barasat, W.B- 700124 [Pan: Abyfs8639J] Vs. Acit, Circle-50(1)(2), Kolkata….…..…...............……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Harsh Vardhan Vhardwaj, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 23, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 02, 2022 Hearing Through Video Conferencing Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 11.08.2021 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. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(Appeals) Had Erred Both In Law & On Facts By Confirming The Order Of The Assessing Officer & Making An Addition Of Rs.2,00,194/- Being Delay In Deposit Of Employees Contribution To Pf & Esi U/S 36(I)(Va) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Despite Assessee Contributing/Depositing The Same Before The Due Date Of Filing Of Return Of Income U/S 139(1) Of The Act. 2. The Appellant Craves Leave To Add, To Amend Or Withdraw To All Or Any Ground On Or Before The Hearing Of The Appeal.”

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” (Virtual Court Hearing) BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member and Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member I.T.A. No.402/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Saha Textile............................................................…………………….……Appellant 29, Saha Textile, K B Bose Road, Barasat, W.B- 700124 [PAN: ABYFS8639J] vs. ACIT, Circle-50(1)(2), Kolkata….…..…...............……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances by: Shri Harsh Vardhan Vhardwaj, CA, appeared on behalf of the appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT-DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. D…

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

…Foundary Pvt. Ltd Vs. CIT 145 DTR 265 (All) e. CIT Vs. Mark Auto Industries (2008) 358 ITR 43 (P&H) f. CIt Vs. Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd (2014) 363 ITR 307 (Raj) g. Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd Vs. DCIT (2014)366 ITR 408 (Kar) h. CIT Vs. Vijay Shree Ltd (2014) 43 Taxmann.com 396 (Cal) i. CIT Vs. Kichha Sugar Co Ltd (2013) 356 ITR 351 (Uttarakhand) In the backdrop of the aforesaid settled position of law, we are of the considered view that the no distinction is to be drawn between the employers as well as employees contribution to PF and ESI as both are covered u/s 43B of the Act. 7. Now, we shall take up the claim…

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

…Foundary Pvt. Ltd Vs. CIT 145 DTR 265 (All) e. CIT Vs. Mark Auto Industries (2008) 358 ITR 43 (P&H) f. CIt Vs. Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd (2014) 363 ITR 307 (Raj) g. Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd Vs. DCIT (2014)366 ITR 408 (Kar) h. CIT Vs. Vijay Shree Ltd (2014) 43 Taxmann.com 396 (Cal) i. CIT Vs. Kichha Sugar Co Ltd (2013) 356 ITR 351 (Uttarakhand) In the backdrop of the aforesaid settled position of law, we are of the considered view that the no distinction is to be drawn between the employers as well as employees contribution to PF and ESI as both are covered u/s 43B of the Act. 7. Now, we shall take up the claim…

Khalsa Bakery, Kaputhala vs. Income Tax Officer Ward -4 (2), Jalandhar

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

ITA 20/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

…Foundary Pvt. Ltd Vs. CIT 145 DTR 265 (All) e. CIT Vs. Mark Auto Industries (2008) 358 ITR 43 (P&H) f. CIt Vs. Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd (2014) 363 ITR 307 (Raj) g. Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd Vs. DCIT (2014)366 ITR 408 (Kar) h. CIT Vs. Vijay Shree Ltd (2014) 43 Taxmann.com 396 (Cal) i. CIT Vs. Kichha Sugar Co Ltd (2013) 356 ITR 351 (Uttarakhand) In the backdrop of the aforesaid settled position of law, we are of the considered view that the no distinction is to be drawn between the employers as well as employees contribution to PF and ESI as both are covered u/s 43B of the Act. 7. Now, we shall take up the claim…

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Ltu, Circle-1., Chennai vs. M/S Paypal India Private Limited, Chennai

Appeal is allowed

ITA 450/CHNY/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Feb 2022AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri P Sajit Kumar(JCIT) – Ld. DRFor Respondent: Shri Ashish– Ld. AR
Section 139(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…

S.E.Palanivel, Salem, Tamilnadu vs. Amrit Raj Singh, Salem

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 352/CHNY/2021[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Feb 2022AY 2018-2019

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

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…

Samay Projects Private Limited, Chennnai vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 331/CHNY/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Feb 2022AY 2018-19

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

Section 139(1)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…

Benco Thermal Technologies Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. Asst. Director of Income Tax, Bengaluru

Appeal is allowed

ITA 281/CHNY/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Feb 2022AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Shri Yeswanth Kumar (CA)-Ld. DRFor Respondent: Shri P.Sajith Kumar (JCIT) – Ld. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)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…