How many judgments cite Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT?

1,392 judgments on BharatTax cite Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (143 Taxmann.com 178), spanning 2022 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 36(1)(va), Section 143(1), Section 43B, Section 143(3), Section 2(24)(x), Section 139(1).

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 367,347 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 43B Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 139(1)Section 250 Section 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 pf section 36(1)(va)section 43b(b)section 34(1)section 2(24)section 43b section 36(1)section 36

Judgments citing Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

M/S. Methods India Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 4(1)(2), Bengaluru

In the result, this issue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 475/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian S, Addl. CIT(DR)

Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 154Section 234ASection 36Section 36(1)(v)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2017-18 The Dy. Commissioner of M/s Methods India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Income Tax, #5A, KIADB Industrial Area, Circle-4[1][2], Hosakote-562 114. Bengaluru. PAN – AABCM 8680 N APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Narendra Sharma, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Subramanian S, Addl. CIT(DR) Date of hearing : 02.05.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 17.05.2024 O R D E R Per Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member :- This is an appeal filed by the assessee against t…

Mahesh Chand Sharma, Faridabad vs. ITO, Ward 1(3), Faridabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 110/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.110/Del/2023 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2018-19 बनाम Mahesh Chand Sharma Ito H.No.1700, Ymca, Vs. Ward 1(3), Opp. Indira Nagar, Faridabad, Faridabad, Haryana. Haryana. Pan No.Beepm9175H अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 43B

…he only issue in appeal of the assessee is disallowance made u/s 43B of the Act in respect of Employees Contribution to PF & ESI. Ld. DR submits that in view of decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Private Limited Vs. CIT (448 ITR 518) the Assessing Officer rightly made the disallowance of the contributions made towards PF & ESI which were paid beyond the due dates specified under the respective acts. 4. We find that the issue in appeal has since been decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Private 2 Limited Vs. CIT (supra), wherein the Hon’b…

Lexicon Infotech Limited, Mumbai vs. Ward 3(2)(1), Mumbai, Aayakar Bhawan

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4411/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 May 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Gagan Goyalm/S. Lexicon Infrastructure Ltd., 909, Dalamal Tower, Free Press Journal Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400 021. Pan: Aaacl 1699M ...... Appellant Vs. Ito Ward 3(2)-1, Aayakar Bhawan, M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 020. ..... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Nishit Gandhi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, Ld. DR

Section 139(5)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 250Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M/s. Lexicon Infrastructure Ltd., 909, Dalamal Tower, Free Press Journal Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400 021. PAN: AAACL 1699M ...... Appellant Vs. ITO Ward 3(2)-1, Aayakar Bhawan, M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 020. ..... Respondent Appellant by : Shri Nishit Gandhi, Ld. AR Respondent by : Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, Ld. DR Date of hearing : 09/05/2024 Date of pronouncement : 16/05/2024 ORDER PER GAGAN GOYAL, A.M: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order…

Naveen Merico Engineering Co. Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir. 12(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 424/KOL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Shri Bibekananda Madhu, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 250Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2017-18 Naveen Merico Engineering ACIT Circle-12(1), Kolkata. Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. 238A, A. J. C. Bose Road, 3rd Floor, Kolkata-700020. (PAN: AADCM5934H) (Appellant)(Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : N o n e Respondent by : Shri Bibekananda Madhu, JCIT, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 09.05.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 15.05.2024 O R D E R PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income…

Express Publications (Madurai)Private Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Corporate Circle-II(1), Chennai

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 797/CHNY/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member)

For Respondent: Shri AR.V. Srinivasan, Addl. CIT

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40a

…o disallowance of Rs.1,35,03,575/- as belated payments of Employees contribution to PF/ESI. It is admitted position that this issue is covered against the assessee by the Judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services P. Ltd Vs CIT [2022] 448 ITR 518 (SC). Respectfully following the same, we confirm the disallowance. The corresponding ground stands dismissed. 9. Next ground No. 7 is in respect to disallowance of Rs.99,465/- being interest on TDS as per Explanation 3 to section 40(a)(ii) of the Act. This ground is not pressed by Ld. AR and hence, dismissed as not pressed. 10. Ground Nos. 8&9…

Income Tax Officer, Chennai vs. Express Publications (Madurai) Pvt Ltd, Chennai

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 1220/CHNY/2023[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 May 2024AY 2013-2014

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member)

For Respondent: Shri AR.V. Srinivasan, Addl. CIT

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40a

Skaps Industries India Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-8, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 595/AHD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 May 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2010-11

Section 10BSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 35DSection 35D(2)Section 43BSection 92Section 92C

…assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 5. As regards to ground no.2, the Ld. AR submitted that in the light of decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Checkmate Services (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT-1 (2022) 448 ITR 518, the said ground is against the assessee. Hence, ground no.2 is dismissed. 6. As regards to ground no.1 related to total expenses of Rs.2,96,92,435/- out of which Rs.16,55,644/- (1/5th of Rs.82,78,218/-) which is eligible under Section 35D(2) of Act should have been allowed as capitalisation for balance of Rs.2,14,14,000/-, the Ld. AR submitted…

Bose Management Services Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 6(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 435/KOL/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 May 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 435/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Bose Management Services Private Income Tax Officer, Ward – 6(1), Limited Vs Kolkata P-82, Dakshini Co-Operative Housing Society Limited Canal South Road Kolkata - 700105 [Pan : Aadcb1495J] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Prabhas Roy, Jcit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01/05/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 08/05/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 30/05/2022, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. When The Case Was Called For Hearing, None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. No Application For Adjournment Has Been Filed. Under These Circumstances, We Proceed To Adjudicate The Instant Appeal Ex- Parte Qua The Assessee, On The Basis Of Available Records & Hearing The Ld. D/R.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Prabhas Roy, JCIT, Sr. D/R

Section 250Section 36(1)(v)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…| आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण "यायपीठ, कोलकाता | IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE DR. MANISH BORAD, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 435/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Bose Management Services Private Income Tax Officer, Ward – 6(1), Limited Vs Kolkata P-82, Dakshini Co-operative Housing Society Limited Canal South Road Kolkata - 700105 [PAN : AADCB1495J] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Prabhas Roy, JCIT, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing : 01/05/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date of P…

Tamilnadu Civil Supplies Corporation, Chennai vs. ACIT, CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 88/CHNY/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 May 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.88/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 Tamilnadu Civil Supplies Corporation, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 10, Thambusamy Road, Kilpauk, Income Tax/Ito, Chennai 600 010. Corporate Circle 3(1), Chennai. [Pan: Aabct0551H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri P. Selva Moorthy, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 01.05.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 08.05.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Against The Order Dated 16.11.2023 Passed By The Nfac [Addl./Jcit(A), Varanasi] For The Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. Ground No. 1 Raised By The Assessee Challenging The Action Of Ld. Addl./Jcit(A) In Treating Employees’ Pf Contribution As Income By Invoking The Provisions Of Section 36(1)(Va) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

For Appellant: Shri P. Selva Moorthy, C.AFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT

Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(va)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’सी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एसएस िव"ने" रिव, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल, लेखा सद" के सम" । Before Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.88/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 Tamilnadu Civil Supplies Corporation, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of No. 10, Thambusamy Road, Kilpauk, Income Tax/ITO, Chennai 600 010. Corporate Circle 3(1), Chennai. [PAN: AABCT0551H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri P. Selva Moorth…

Moog Motion Controls Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 184/BANG/2024[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 May 2024AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2019-20 M/S. Moog Motion Controls Pvt. Ltd., Acit, Site No.42-43, Doraisanipalya Circle – 4(1)(1), Village, Vs. Bengaluru. Opp. Oracle (Kalyani Magnum), Bilekahalli, Begur Hobli, Bengaluru – 560 076. Pan : Aadcm 3828 J Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Srinivas K. P, Ca Revenue By : Shri. V. Parithivel, Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 20.03.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 08.05.2024

For Appellant: Shri. Srinivas K. P, CAFor Respondent: Shri. V. Parithivel, JCIT(DR)(ITAT)

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 90

…are reproduced below for reference: 8. At the threshold, we may herein observe that the issue involved in the present appeal, i.e., whether or not prior to the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT-1 (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC), the assessee’s claim for deduction of delayed deposit of employee’s share of contribution towards ESI/PF could have been validly disallowed by the CPC, Bengaluru vide intimation issued u/s. 143(1) of the Act had been Page 9 of 19 deliberated upon and adjudicated by the Tribunal in the orders passed in the cases, viz. (i) Gurmeet Singh Hora…

Markolines Infra Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT/DCIT Circle 15(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee for the assessment year 2020-

ITA 366/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 May 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailshri Gagan Goyaland

For Appellant: Shri Pradip KapasiFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

…delayed payment of Employees’ Contribution towards Employees State Insurance Corporation (“ESIC”)/Provident Fund (“PF”). As per the Revenue, this issue has been decided in its favour by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT, [2022] 448 ITR 518 (SC), wherein it was held that payment of Employees’ Contribution towards ESIC/PF beyond the due date prescribed under the relevant statute is not allowable u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act. 5. On the other hand, the assessee has filed cross-objection and raised the following grounds: - “1 Ground No.1: Non admission and adjudication of the Additional G…

Markolines Infra Pvt Ltd., Belapur vs. ACIT/DCIT Circle-15(1)(1), Mumbai

ITA 1170/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 May 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailshri Gagan Goyaland

For Appellant: Shri Pradip KapasiFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

…delayed payment of Employees' Contribution towards Employees State Insurance Corporation (“ESIC”)/Provident Fund (“PF”). As per the Revenue, this issue has been decided in its favour by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT, [2022] 448 ITR 518 (SC), wherein it was held that payment of Employees' Contribution towards ESIC/PF beyond the due date prescribed under the relevant statute is not allowable u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act. 5. On the other hand, the assessee has filed cross-objection and raised the following grounds: - "1 Ground No.1: Non admission and adjudication of the Additional Gro…

ACIT-15(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Markolines Infra Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 2967/MUM/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 May 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailshri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri Pradip KapasiFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

…delayed payment of Employees' Contribution towards Employees State Insurance Corporation (“ESIC”)/Provident Fund (“PF”). As per the Revenue, this issue has been decided in its favour by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT, [2022] 448 ITR 518 (SC), wherein it was held that payment of Employees' Contribution towards ESIC/PF beyond the due date prescribed under the relevant statute is not allowable u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act. 5. On the other hand, the assessee has filed cross-objection and raised the following grounds:- “1 Ground No.1: Non admission and adjudication of the Additional Grou…

M/S Barnala Builders and Consultant, Zirakpur vs. DCIT/ACIT (Cen)-1, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 274/CHANDI/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)

…return of income under section 139(1) of the Act. 4.1 It was further submitted that the assessee appreciates that the legal position has changed now after the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Checkmate Services P. Ltd. & Ors. Vs. CIT & Ors. (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC) and the assessee bows before the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court. It was submitted that the assessee appreciates that the Parliament in its wisdom has treated the contribution of employers and employees under different provisions of Income Tax Act, and which has been upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. It was submitted that the idea behin…

Express Publications (Madurai)Private Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Company Circle-II(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 805/CHNY/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.805/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Express Publications (Madurai) P. Ltd, Vs. Dcit No.29, Express Garden, Company Circle Ii (1) Second Main Road Industrial Estate, Now Corporate Circle 2 (1) Ambattur, Chennai 600 058. Chennai 600 034. [Pan: Aaaci 0842D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Ms. Abirami Narendranath, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri Saujanya Ranjan, Irs, Jcit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 22.04.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 07.05.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manu Kumar Giri ()

For Appellant: Ms. Abirami Narendranath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Saujanya Ranjan, IRS, JCIT

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 40Section 40a

…o disallowance of Rs.1,01,02,179/- as belated payments of Employees contribution to PF/ESI. It is admitted position that this issue is covered against the assessee by the Judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services P. Ltd Vs CIT [2022] 448 ITR 518 (SC). Respectfully following the same, we confirm the disallowance. The corresponding grounds stands dismissed. 8. Next ground No. 7 is in respect to disallowance of Rs.8,82,059/- being interest on TDS as per Explanation 3 to section 40(a)(ii) of the Act. This ground is not pressed by Ld. AR and hence, dismissed as not pressed. 9. The next ground…

Zahir Kasam Memon, Vasai vs. Addl-JCIT (A)-2 Chennai, Chennai

The appeal stand dismissed

ITA 471/CHNY/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 May 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.471/Chny/2024 (िनधा(रण वष( / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Mr.Zahir Kasam Memon Addl / Jcit (A)-2, बनाम Memon Brothers, Piniarwada Pne-C-(72)(1) Kumbharwada, Zenda Bazar, Chennai. / Vs. Vasai West, Maharashtra – 401 201. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aempm-1407-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : None " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan (Addl.Cit) - Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30-04-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 06-05-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

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

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)

…t Employers’ contribution since the same was deposited before due dates as specified u/s 139(1). However, the disallowance of Employee’s Contribution was confirmed by following the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. (143 Taxmann.com 178). The Ld. CIT(A) also held that this adjustment could be made u/s 143(1) in terms of decision of Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of AA520 Veerappampalayam PACS Ltd. (138 Taxann.com 571). Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 3. Since the impugned order follows binding judicial precedents and the same is also in…

M/S. Signotech Systems Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6(1)(1), Bengaluru

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

ITA 514/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 May 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year : 2020-21 M/S. Signotech Systems Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, L-151, 2Nd Floor, Ck Pearl Complex, Circle – 6(1)(1), 14Th Cross, 5Th Main, Bengaluru. 6Th Sector, Hsr Layout, Bengaluru – 560 102. Pan : Aavcs 6085 P Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Ms. Sunaiana Bhatia, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Subramanian S, Jcit (Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 06.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.05.2024

For Appellant: Ms. Sunaiana Bhatia, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Subramanian S, JCIT (DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 234BSection 250Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

…of April, May and June. Since the employees’ contribution was assumed to be paid not within the due date prescribed under the respective Act, the CIT(A) following the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd., reported in 448 ITR 518 (SC) upheld the adjustment made under section 143(1) of the Act. 5. Aggrieved by the Order of the CIT(A), assessee has filed the present appeal before the Tribunal. Assessee has filed a Paper Book enclosing therein the written Page 4 of 5 submissions filed before the CIT(A) and relevant annexures along with it. The learned AR reiterated the sub…

Kalpajeet Basu Mallik, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-32(1), Kolkata.

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 1212/KOL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 May 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 1212/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2020-2021 Kalpajeet Basu Mallik,………………………….Appellant 2C, F-201, Chakraberia Lane, Elgin Road, L.R. Sarani, Kolkata-700020 [Pan:Ahbpm6983A] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,……Respondent Circle-32(1), Kolkata, 10B, Middleton Row, Kolkata-700071 Appearances By: Shri C. Roy, C.A., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Manas Mondal, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: April 29, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: May 01, 2024 O R D E R

Section 143(1)

…ITA No. 1212/KOL/2023 (A.Y. 2020-2021) Kalpajeet Basu Mallik THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ) & Dr. Manish Borad, Accountant Member I.T.A. No. 1212/KOL/2023 Assessment Year: 2020-2021 Kalpajeet Basu Mallik,………………………….Appellant 2C, F-201, Chakraberia Lane, Elgin Road, L.R. Sarani, Kolkata-700020 [PAN:AHBPM6983A] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,……Respondent Circle-32(1), Kolkata, 10B, Middleton Row, Kolkata-700071 Appearances by: Shri C. Roy, C.A., appeared on behalf of the assessee Shri Manas Mondal, Addl. CIT, Sr. D.R., appeared on be…

Inscribe Graphics Ltd, Chennai vs. DCIT, Corporate Circle- 1(1), Chennai

The appeal stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 359/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.359/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2018-19) M/S Inscribe Graphics Ltd. Dcit बनाम/ Vs. 174, Developed Plots, Industrial Estate Corp. Circle 1(1) Perungudi, Chennai – 600 096 Chennai – 600 034 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacci-0211-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri P.M.Kathir (Advocate) – Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Arv Srinivasan (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29-04-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 01-05-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2018- 19 Arises Out Of The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 17-01-2024 In The Matter Of An Intimation Issued By Cpc U/S 143(1) On 17.06.2020. In The Intimation, Cpc Disallowed A Sum Of Rs.19.46 Lacs On Account Of Failure To Deposit Employees’ Contribution To Esi / Pf Before Due Date As Specified In Respective Welfare Acts.

For Appellant: Shri P.M.Kathir (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri ARV Srinivasan (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR

Section 143(1)

…since it was a debatable issue. It was also contended that PF was remitted within 15 days from the disbursement of salary as permitted under the act. The Ld. CIT(A), relying on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. (143 Taxmann.com 178), confirmed the disallowance. The Ld. CIT(A) also held that this adjustment could be made while processing return of income u/s 143(1) as per various decisions of Tribunal. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 2. The Ld. AR reiterated that this adjustment could not be made u/s 143(1). The Ld. AR also submitted that the…

Goribi Abdul Karim Nadaf, Pune vs. Commissioner Income Tax (Appeals), Addl JCIT (A) -1 Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 517/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Apr 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Tripathi

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

…of treating the employee’s share as having the same character as that of the employer’s share, becoming deductible u/s 36(1)(iv) read in the hue of section 43B(b). Recently, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Checkmate Services P. Ltd. & Ors. VS. CIT & Ors. (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC) has threadbare considered this issue and drawn a distinction between the parameters for allowing deduction of employer’s share and employees’ share in the relevant funds. It has been held that the contribution by the employees to the relevant funds is the employer’s income u/s.2(24)(x), but the deduction for the same can be allowed only if s…