Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

143 Taxmann.com 178Supreme Court of India2022#28 most cited

What is Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Employee contributions to provident fund and ESI deposited by an employer beyond the due dates prescribed under the respective special Acts are not allowable as a deduction under section 36(1)(va) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Such disallowance can be made during processing under section 143(1).

1,392

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Checkmate Services · Section 36(1)(va) · Section 43B · employees contribution to PF · ESI payment · due date for deposit · Section 143(1) disallowance · delayed payment of PF/ESI · Provident Fund · Employee State Insurance · 448 ITR 518 · 143 Taxmann.com 178

Also reported as

448 ITR 518218 DTR 401

Sections most often in play

Section 36(1)(va)Section 143(1)Section 43BSection 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 139(1)Section 250Section 37(1)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

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

Judgments citing Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

Novelvox Softwares India Pvt. Ltd., Haryana vs. ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3757/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. M. Balaganeshita No. 3757/Del/2023 : Asstt. Year : 2020-21 Novelvox Softwares India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Adit, Ssr Corporate Park, 8Th Floor, 802- Cpc, 803, Faridabad, Haryana-121003 Bengaluru-560100 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aacci0512Q Assessee By : Sh. Sanat Kapoor, Adv. & Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Akhilesh Kumar Yadav, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 05.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 10.12.2024

For Appellant: Sh. Sanat Kapoor, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Akhilesh Kumar Yadav, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 36

…ing rival submissions and find no merit in the assessee’s former twin substantive arguments. There would be hardly in dispute between the parties that hon’ble apex court’s landmark decision in Checkmate Services P. Ltd. vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax-I (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC) has already settled the issue in department’s favour that the necessary compliance of crediting the prescribed ESI/PF dues ought to be as per the due date given in the said corresponding statute(s) than that of filing section 139(1) return. This is further coupled with the fact that case law (2024) 159 taxmann.com 321 (Bom.) Rohan Korgaonkar…

Goldman Sachs (India) Securiteis Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Add/Jt/Dy/Asst/CIT/ITO/NFAC, Delhi

ITA 763/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singhshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgrawalFor Respondent: Ms. Neena Jeph, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 253(1)Section 92C

…he concerned authority neither granted any specific exemption to the assessee in this regard nor extended the due date for making the payment due on 15/04/2017. We find that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. v/s CIT, reported in [2022] 448 ITR 518 (SC) held that the payment towards employees' contribution to Provident Fund after the due date prescribed under the relevant statute is not allowable as a deduction under section 36(1)(va) of the Act. Therefore, respectfully following the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court cited supra, we find no merits in assessee's submissions. Accordingly,…

Shilpa Steel and Powers Ltd, Nagpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Nagpur

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 317/NAG/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur06 Dec 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh V. LoyaFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 234CSection 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…The learned Departmental Representative strongly supported the order of the learned CIT(A) and contended that the delayed payment of PF/ESIC are disallowable in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. v/s CIT, [2022] 448 ITR 518 (SC). 9. We have given a thoughtful consideration to the arguments made by the rival parties and perused the material available on record. In ground no.6,the assessee is aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT(A) in not considering rectification order dated 04/02/2020, passed under section 154 by which the addition amount was restricted to ` 9…

M/S. Bakshi Security & Personnel Services P Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward 12(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 4266/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Haresh P. Shah, A/RFor Respondent: Ms. Monika H. Pande, Sr. D/R
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…g due consideration, we find that the quarrel in respect of delay in deposit of employees’ contribution toward provident fund, has been settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in its decision in the case of Checkmate Services P. Ltd. & Ors. vs. CIT & Ors. (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC). Therefore, without going into the issues raised by the ld. Counsel for the assessee, we have no hesitation to say that they are now irrelevant qua the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 7. Insofar as, the delay in deposit of employer’s contribution is concerned, we are of the considered view that it needs to be re-verified at the assess…

Mehra Metal Components Private Limited, Nehru Place vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 16(1), C.R. Building

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 2547/DEL/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Dec 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2022-23 Mehra Metal Components Vs. Dcit, Pvt. Ltd., Circle-16(1), 201, Harsh Bhawan, 64-65 New Delhi Nehru Place, New Delhi Pan: Aaacm8494M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Ankur Agarwal, Ca Department By Sh. B. S. Anand, Sr. Dr

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 438Section 43B

…ete any or all of the grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing. 2 | P a g e 4. Suffice to say, it has come on record during the course of hearing that hon’ble apex court in the recent landmark judgment in Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC) has already settled the issue in department’s favour that employees’ contribution to Provident Fund (PF) and Employee’s State Insurance (ESI) has to be deposited on or before the due date in the corresponding statute than that prescribed under section 139(1) of the Act. 5. Faced with this situation; learned counsel submitted that such a disa…

DCIT Corporate Circle 1(1), Chennai vs. Allsec Technologies Limited, Chennai

The appeal stand partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1662/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Dec 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1255/Chny/2019 (िनधा)रणवष) / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1662/Chny/2019 (िनधा)रणवष) / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Dcit M/S. Allsec Technologies Limited बनाम/ Corporate Circle-1(1), 560, 562, 7H Century Plaza, Vs. Chennai. Teynampet, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 018. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.Aacca-5106-G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Revenue By : Ms. Kavitha (Addl.Cit) - Ld. Sr. Dr " थ"कीओरसे/ Assessee By : Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) - Ld.Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20-11-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 03-12-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1.1 Aforesaid Appeals By Revenue For Assessment Year (Ay) 2010-11 & 2011-12 Has Common Issues. First We Take Up Appeal For Ay 2010-11 Which Arises Out Of The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Chennai [Cit(A)] Dated 31-01-2019 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 143(3) R.W.S.

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) - Ld.ARFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha (Addl.CIT) - Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 195Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…of Sec. 36(1)(va) disallowed the same. The Ld. CIT(A) deleted the same against which the revenue is in further appeal before us. We find that this issue has now been settled in revenue’s favour by Hon’ble Apex Court in Checkmate Services P. Ltd Vs. CIT (2022) 143 Taxmann.com 178 (SC). Respectfully following the same, the disallowance as made by Ld. AO stand restored. The corresponding grounds as raised by the revenue stand allowed. The appeal stand allowed. Conclusion 8. stand partly allowed. ITA No.1662/Chny/2019 stands allowed. Order pronounced on 3rd December, 2024 (MANU KUMAR GIRI) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) "ाि…

DCIT Corporate Circle 1(1), Chennai vs. Allsec Technologies Limited, Chennai

The appeal stand partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1255/CHNY/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Dec 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1255/Chny/2019 (िनधा)रणवष) / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1662/Chny/2019 (िनधा)रणवष) / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Dcit M/S. Allsec Technologies Limited बनाम/ Corporate Circle-1(1), 560, 562, 7H Century Plaza, Vs. Chennai. Teynampet, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 018. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.Aacca-5106-G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Revenue By : Ms. Kavitha (Addl.Cit) - Ld. Sr. Dr " थ"कीओरसे/ Assessee By : Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) - Ld.Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20-11-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 03-12-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1.1 Aforesaid Appeals By Revenue For Assessment Year (Ay) 2010-11 & 2011-12 Has Common Issues. First We Take Up Appeal For Ay 2010-11 Which Arises Out Of The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Chennai [Cit(A)] Dated 31-01-2019 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 143(3) R.W.S.

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) - Ld.ARFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha (Addl.CIT) - Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 195Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…of Sec. 36(1)(va) disallowed the same. The Ld. CIT(A) deleted the same against which the revenue is in further appeal before us. We find that this issue has now been settled in revenue’s favour by Hon’ble Apex Court in Checkmate Services P. Ltd Vs. CIT (2022) 143 Taxmann.com 178 (SC). Respectfully following the same, the disallowance as made by Ld. AO stand restored. The corresponding grounds as raised by the revenue stand allowed. The appeal stand allowed. Conclusion 8. stand partly allowed. ITA No.1662/Chny/2019 stands allowed. Order pronounced on 3rd December, 2024 (MANU KUMAR GIRI) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) "ाि…

Qpave Solutions Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(2), Bangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1685/BANG/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Sri Subramanya Bhat, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Parithivel, D.R

…ITA No.1684&1685/Bang/2024 QPAVE Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1684&1685/Bang/2024 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 QPAVE Solutions Private Limited No.9 VS Naidu Street Shivaji Nagar ITO Vs. Bengaluru 560 051 Ward-5(2)(1) Bangalore PAN NO : AAACQ4291L APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Sri Subramanya Bhat, A.R. Respondent by : Shri V. Parithivel, D.R. Date of Hearing : 26.11.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 29.11.2024 O R D E R PER KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL ME…

Qpave Solutions Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(2), Bangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1684/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Sri Subramanya Bhat, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Parithivel, D.R

…ITA No.1684&1685/Bang/2024 QPAVE Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1684&1685/Bang/2024 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 QPAVE Solutions Private Limited No.9 VS Naidu Street Shivaji Nagar ITO Vs. Bengaluru 560 051 Ward-5(2)(1) Bangalore PAN NO : AAACQ4291L APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Sri Subramanya Bhat, A.R. Respondent by : Shri V. Parithivel, D.R. Date of Hearing : 26.11.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 29.11.2024 O R D E R PER KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL ME…

Bofa Securities India Limited, Mumbai vs. Centralised Processing Centre of Income Tax Department, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4192/MUM/2024[AY 2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2024

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Smt. Renu Jauhribofa Securities India V/S. Acit-Circle-(4)(1)(1), Limited बनाम Mumbai Ground Floor, A Wing, One Aaykar Bhavan, M. K. Bkc, G Block, Bkc, Road, Bandra(E), Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400051 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaacd0535G Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Shri Anish Thacker &For Respondent: Shri Anurag Tripathi
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

…tronic Challan cum Return for the month of May 2021 on account of non-seeding of Aadhaar in the Universal Account Number (UAN). by relying on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court (SC) in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt Ltd vs Commissioner Of Income Tax-1 [448 ITR 518] without appreciating that the facts in case of Appellant are different than the above case. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, while disposing of ground no. 1 and 2 raised before the learned CIT(A), the learned CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating ground no. 2 as an independent ground and thereby, erred in not explicitly grant…

Jaika Motors Pvt Ltd, Nagpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle - 2, Nagpur

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

ITA 198/NAG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kishore P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(1)Section 234BSection 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER ITA no.198/Nag./2024 (Assessment Year : 2018–19) Jaika Motors Pvt. Ltd. Commercial Road, Civil Lines ……………. Appellant Nagpur 440 001 PAN – AAACJ4700D v/s Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Circle–2, Nagpur Assessee by : Shri Kishore P. Dewani Revenue by : Shri Abhay Y. Marathe Date of Hearing – 18/11/2024 Date of Order – 28/11/2024 O R D E R PER K.M. ROY, A.M. This appeal by the assessee is against the impugned order dated 11/03/2024, passed by the learned Co…

Schaeffler India Limited, Vadodara, Gujarat vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore (Jao-Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle1(1)(1), Vadodara, Gujarat

ITA 692/AHD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Nov 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Bhavin Marfatia, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, CIT D.R. & Smt
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 234Section 271(1)(c)Section 37

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.275/Ahd/2023 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) Schaeffler India Ltd., Vs. Assistant Commissioner of (A successor of Luk India Pvt. Ltd.), Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Opp. ABB, P.O. Maneja Vadodara Vadodara-390013 (Earlier ACIT, Circle-1, Hosur) [PAN No.AAACL6817D] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) I.T.A. No.299/Ahd/2023 (Assessment Years: 2012-13) Assistant Commissioner of Vs. M/s. Schaeffler India Ltd. Income Tax, (Erstwhile Luk India Pvt. Circle-1(1)(1), Ltd.), Vado…

The ACIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara vs. Schaeffler India Ltd.( Erstwhile Luk India Pvt. Ltd)), Vadodara

ITA 299/AHD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Nov 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Bhavin Marfatia, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, CIT D.R. & Smt
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 234Section 271(1)(c)Section 37

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.275/Ahd/2023 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) Schaeffler India Ltd., Vs. Assistant Commissioner of (A successor of Luk India Pvt. Ltd.), Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Opp. ABB, P.O. Maneja Vadodara Vadodara-390013 (Earlier ACIT, Circle-1, Hosur) [PAN No.AAACL6817D] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) I.T.A. No.299/Ahd/2023 (Assessment Years: 2012-13) Assistant Commissioner of Vs. M/s. Schaeffler India Ltd. Income Tax, (Erstwhile Luk India Pvt. Circle-1(1)(1), Ltd.), Vado…

Schaeffler India Ltd.(A Successor of Luk India Pvt. Ltd)), Vadodara vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(1)(1) (Earlier ACIT, Circle-1, Hosur), Vadodara

ITA 275/AHD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Nov 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Bhavin Marfatia, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, CIT D.R. & Smt
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 234Section 271(1)(c)Section 37

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.275/Ahd/2023 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) Schaeffler India Ltd., Vs. Assistant Commissioner of (A successor of Luk India Pvt. Ltd.), Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Opp. ABB, P.O. Maneja Vadodara Vadodara-390013 (Earlier ACIT, Circle-1, Hosur) [PAN No.AAACL6817D] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) I.T.A. No.299/Ahd/2023 (Assessment Years: 2012-13) Assistant Commissioner of Vs. M/s. Schaeffler India Ltd. Income Tax, (Erstwhile Luk India Pvt. Circle-1(1)(1), Ltd.), Vado…

Ashok Kumar, Gurgaon vs. ITO Ward 1(3), Gurgaon

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose in above terms

ITA 1519/DEL/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. M. Balaganeshita No. 1519/Del/2024 : Asstt. Year : 2018-19 Ashok Kumar Vs Income Tax Officer Near Shiv Floormill, Shiv Nagar, Ward-1(3), Patuadi Road, Gurgaon-122001 Gurgaon, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Betpk7014L Assessee By : None Revenue By : An Application For Adjournment By Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 11.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.11.2024 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2018-19, Arises Against The Cit(A)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [In Short The “Nfac”], Delhi Dated 02.02.2024. 2. Case Called Twice. None Appear At The Assessee’S Behest. It Is Accordingly Proceeded Ex-Parte.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: An application for adjournment by Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…e towards employees' contribution to provident fund.” 4. Suffice to say, it is clear as per the assessee’s foregoing pleadings that hon’ble apex court’s recent landmark decision in the case of Checkmate Services P. Ltd. vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax-I (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC) dated 12.10.2022 has already settled the issue of such ESI/PF that such dues have to be deposited as per due date(s) in the corresponding statute(s) than that of filing of return u/s 139(1) of the Act. We thus, find no merit in assessee’s sole substantive grievance in principle. We make it clear at the same time that the assessee shall indee…

Neeta Tiwari, Lucknow vs. ITO-4(1), Lucknow

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 493/LKW/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow14 Nov 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2022-23 Neeta Tiwari V. The Ito-4(1) A-6, South City Lucknow - New Ambedkar University Road Lucknow Tan/Pan:Afopt6232J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri P. K. Kapoor, C.A. Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 08 10 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 14 11 2024 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri P. K. Kapoor, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)

…isallowance, though not admitted, could not have exceeded Rs.9,21,544/-. 5. BECAUSE in confirming the disallowance u/s 36(1) (va) the reliance placed by the ld. "CIT(A)" 'on the decision of Apex Court in Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT reported in [2022] 448 ITR 518 (SC) is wholly misplaced as the facts of the said case are distinguishable from the facts of the present case. 6. BECAUSE the order appealed against is contrary to facts, law and the principles of natural justice. 7. BECAUSE each ground taken in appeal is mutually exclusive and without prejudice to each other. ITA No.493/LKW/2024 Page 4 of 6 8…

M/S. Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 383/AHD/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 115JSection 144Section 2Section 35Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 37Section 43BSection 80I

…Ground nos.1 & 2 of the assessee’s appeal are allowed 53. The Ld. AR submitted that Ground no.3 relating to delayed payment of Employees’ State Insurance Contributions (ESIC), the same is held against the assessee in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd., 448 ITR 518 (SC). Hence, Ground no.3 of assessee’s appeal is dismissed. 54. Thus, ITA No.383/Ahd/2020 of the assessee is partly allowed. 55. In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on this 12th November, 2024. (MAKARAND VASANT MAHAD…

The Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Ahmedabad

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

ITA 345/AHD/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 115JSection 144Section 2Section 35Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 37Section 43BSection 80I

…Ground nos.1 & 2 of the assessee’s appeal are allowed 53. The Ld. AR submitted that Ground no.3 relating to delayed payment of Employees’ State Insurance Contributions (ESIC), the same is held against the assessee in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd., 448 ITR 518 (SC). Hence, Ground no.3 of assessee’s appeal is dismissed. 54. Thus, ITA No.383/Ahd/2020 of the assessee is partly allowed. 55. In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on this 12th November, 2024. (MAKARAND VASANT MAHAD…

Principal Commissioner of Incomed Tax 9, Kolkata vs. Mr. Altabur Rahaman Mollah

The appeal stands disposed of

ITAT/185/2024HC Calcutta08 Nov 2024

Bench: : The Hon’Ble The Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam

Section 2(24)(x)Section 254Section 260ASection 263Section 43B

…1 OD-18 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX) ORIGINAL SIDE ITAT/185/2024 IA NO : GA/1/2024 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-9, KOLKATA VS MR. ALTABUR RAHAMAN MOLLAH BEFORE : THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM And THE HON’BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA Date : 8th November, 2024 Appearance : Ms. Smita Das De, Adv. …for appellant The Court : This appeal has been filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) challenging the order dated 29th November, 2023, passed by the Income Tax Appellate…

Kottarakara Taluk Government Servant Co-Op Society Ltd, Kollam vs. The ITO Ward 2, Kollam

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 402/COCH/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Nov 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: --- None---For Respondent: Smt.V.Swarnalatha, Sr.DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 80P

…ng the assessee’s sec.36(1)(va) and section 80P deduction(s) in section 143(1)(a)(v) “processing” dated 29.09.2020. 2 ITA No.402/Coch/2023. Kottarakara Taluk Govt Servant Co-op So Ltd. 3. Suffice to say, case law(s) Checkmate Services (P) Ltd., vs. CIT [2022] 448 ITR 518 (SC) and [2024] 159 taxmann.com 321 (Bom.) Rohan Korgaonkar vs. DCIT quoted at the Revenue’s behest have already settle the issue against the assessee that such dues have to be credited within the “due” date as per the corresponding statute than that of sec.139(1) return date and a disallowance to this effect could be indeed made in sec.143(1)(a)…