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 367,368 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

Scns Private Ltd, Mumbai vs. CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, disallowance in principle is confirmed, but restricted up to Rs

ITA 2170/MUM/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Gagan Goyalscns Private Limited 21 A Chapel Road, Bandra West, Mumbai-400 050 Pan: Aazcs2004A ...... Appellant Vs. Cpc Bengalure Begaluru-560 500 ..... Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Kakoli Ghosh, Ld. DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 254(2)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SCNS Private Limited 21 A Chapel Road, Bandra West, Mumbai-400 050 PAN: AAZCS2004A ...... Appellant Vs. CPC Bengalure Begaluru-560 500 ..... Respondent Appellant by : None Respondent by : Ms. Kakoli Ghosh, Ld. DR Date of hearing : 01/08/2023 Date of pronouncement : 27/10/2023 O R D E R PER GAGAN GOYAL, A.M: This appeal by assessee is directed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre (for short “NFAC”), Delhi dated 30.09.2021 u/s. 250 of the Income Tax…

Haryana Traders Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 11(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 657/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Oct 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. DR

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

…date of filing of return under section 139(1) of the Act. The claim of the assessee cannot be accepted as the issue now stands settled against the assessee by the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in M/s. Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. (supra) reported in 2 448 ITR 518 (SC). We, therefore find no merit in the ground raised by the assessee which we hereby reject. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 27th October, 2023. sd/- sd/- (DR. BRR KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 27/10/2023 Veena…

Gautam Technocast, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 2335/MUM/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B R Baskaran, Hon’Ble & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry, Hon’Blegautam Technocast, Dy. Cit Cpc, Bangalore. 7/12, Meckone House, Vs. 369, Bhandarkar Road, Matunga East, Mumbai 400 019. Pan Aabfg8700E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Kishore ShahFor Respondent: Shri Paresh Deshpande, Sr AR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)

…of late payment of employees’ contribution to PF/ESI in favour of the assessee. Subsequently, consequent to the miscellaneous application filed by the revenue upon receipt of order passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services P Ltd (2022)(448 ITR 518)(SC), the above said order was recalled by the Tribunal in 2 Gautam Technocast the order dated 12-09-2023 passed in M A No.224/Mum/2023. Accordingly, this appeal was placed before us by the Registry. 3. The assessee had paid employees’s contribution to PF/ESI amounting to Rs.3,41,344/- beyond the due date prescribed in the respective Acts and h…

Aditya Birla Fashion and Retail Ltd., Mumbai vs. ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, appeal of assessee stands dismissed

ITA 1643/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1643/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Aditya Birla Fashion & बिधम / Acit, Cpc, Retail Ltd. Piramal Agastya Bengaluru, Vs. Corporate Park, Building A, Karnataka-560500. 4Th & 5Th Floor, L.B.S. Road, Kurla-Mumbai-400070. स्थधयी लेखध सं/.जीआइआर सं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aaecp2371C (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh TharFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Alam, CIT-DR

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

…’] for delayed deposit of Employees Contribution to Provident Fund (PF). According to the Ld. AR, this issue is covered against the assessee by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services P. Ltd v/s. Commissioner of Income Tax (448 ITR 518 (SC), therefore, this issue is not being pressed, so it is dismissed. 3. Coming to the only other ground no.1 which is against the action of the CIT(A) confirming the disallowance of the provisions made for leave encashment amounting 2 Aditya Birla Fashion and Retail Ltd. to Rs. 14,70,00,661/- without appreciating that such provision was made…

Master Polishers Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee stands dismissed

ITA 1762/MUM/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri N. K. Choudhry, Jm & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ujjawal Kumar Chavan, Sr

Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 34(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…the last date, as prescribed in the respective statutes, which resulted into making the aforesaid addition/disallowance u/s 36(1)(va) read with section 2(24)(x) of the Act. 5. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC) has laid down the dictum that payment towards Employees’ contribution on account of PF/ESIC made after the due date as prescribed under the relevant statutes, is not allowable as deduction under section 36(1)(va) of the Act, by concluding as under: “52. When Parliament introduced section 43B, what was on the statute book, was only employer'…

Bihari Lal Menghani, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-34(1), New Delhi

ITA 2893/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Delhi25 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiya & Sh. Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2017-18 Bihari Lal Menghani, Dcit 2Nd Circle – 34 (1) Wz-13, Floor, Bindra Vs New Delhi Market, Tilak Nagar, New Delhi Pan No.Aaffb5151N (Appellant) (Respondent)

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

…ds ESI and PF. The assessee has claimed to have deposited before filing the return of income. 4. This issue has now been settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in favour of the revenue and against the assessee in the case of Check Mate Services Private Limited 448 ITR 518 wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held as under :- “53. The distinction between an employer’s contribution which is its primary liability under law – in terms of Section 36(1)(iv), and its liability to deposit amounts received by it or deducted by it (Section 36(1)(va)) is, thus crucial. The former forms part of the employers’ income, and th…

Padma Dhurway, Durg vs. Income Tax Officer-1(1), Bhilai, Durg

ITA 272/RPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur25 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 272/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Padma Dhurway, Near Pawan Kirana Store, Sangram Chowk, Prem Nagar, Sikola Bhata, Durg (C.G.)-491 001. Pan : Aarpd5814C .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer-1(1), Bhilai (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR

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

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण "यायपीठ रायपुर म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 272/RPR/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Padma Dhurway, Near Pawan Kirana Store, Sangram Chowk, Prem Nagar, Sikola Bhata, Durg (C.G.)-491 001. PAN : AARPD5814C .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/s. The Income Tax Officer-1(1), Bhilai (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee by : Shri R.B Doshi, CA Revenue by : Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 16.10.2023 घोषणा क" तार…

Bihari Lal Menghani, New Delhi vs. DCIT CPC, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2011-12 is partly allowed and appeal of the assessee for AY 2018-19 is dismissed

ITA 1623/DEL/2020[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. DR

Section 131Section 143(3)

…the Government account beyond the due dates prescribed under the respective acts but well before the date of filing the return of income. We find that the recent decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd Vs. CIT reported 448 ITR 518 had settled the entire dispute to rest by deciding it in favour of the revenue by observing as under:- ITA Nos. 1678/Del/2017 & 1623/Del/2020 Bihari lal Menghani “53. The distinction between an employer’s contribution which is its primary liability under law – in terms of Section 36(1)(iv), and its liability to deposit amounts received by it or…

M/S Bihari Lal Menghani, New Delhi vs. JCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2011-12 is partly allowed and appeal of the assessee for AY 2018-19 is dismissed

ITA 1678/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. DR

Section 131Section 143(3)

Diwyesh Mahendra Dave, Mumbai vs. DCIT 26(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 204/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 34(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…1 ITA 204/Mum/2022 Diwyesh Mahendra Dave IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E”,MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND MS. PADMAVATHY S. (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A. No.204/Mum/2022 (Assessment year : 2018-19) Diwyesh Mahendra Dave vs Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, 301, Corporate Centre, LBS Marg CPC, Bangaluru / Mumbai DCIT Mulund, Mumbai-400 080 26(1), Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra PAN : AAAPD2673C Kurla Com plex, Mumbai, Maharashtra-400 051 APPELLANT RESPONDENT Present for the Assessee None Present for the Department Shri P.D. Chogule (Addl.CIT) SR AR Date of hearing 12/09/2023 Dat…

Dy.Comm of Income Tax-17(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Maharashtra State Security Corporation, Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is allowed

ITA 1837/MUM/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Oct 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 139Section 142Section 143Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

…In this regard, it was contended that section 2(24)(x) deals with an increase in income, is fortified by the Supreme Court, relevant part of paragraph 35 of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Checkmate Services P. Ltd. V Commissioner of Income Tax -1[(2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC)] has been reproduced below : "22.2. In addition, contribution of the employees to the various funds which are deducted by the employer from the salaries and wages of the employees will be taxed as income within brackets insertion of new [clause (x) in clause (24) of Section 2] of the employer, if such contribution is not credited by the empl…

Dy.Comm of Income Tax-17(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Maharashtra State Security Corporation, Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is allowed

ITA 1836/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 139Section 142Section 143Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

Abhipra Capital Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Delhi

In the result, appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 1494/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Oct 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI G.S PANNU, HON’BLE (President), SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri V. Rajkumar, Adv

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: A: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S PANNU, HON’BLE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2020-21 Abhipra Capital Ltd., The DCIT, Circle-1(1), New Delhi G.F, 58-59, World Trade Centre, Barakhamba Lane, Connaught Place, vs. Delhi 110001 PAN AABCA 1702 F (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri V. Rajkumar, Adv. Revenue For : Shri Kanv Bali Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 12.10.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 19.10.2023 ORDER PER CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, J.M. This appeal has been filed against the order ld. NFAC/CIT(A), New Delhi dated 23.02.2023 for…

M/S Hardayal Singh Patel, Raipur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Raipur-1, Raipur

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

ITA 189/RPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur19 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 189/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 M/S. Hardayal Singh Patel 43, Golden Homes, Vip Estate, Khamardih (C.G.)-492 001 Pan : Aabfh5997A .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Raipur-1 ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri B. Subramanyam, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Ila M Parmar, CIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 43B

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण "यायपीठ रायपुर म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 189/RPR/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 M/s. Hardayal Singh Patel 43, Golden Homes, VIP Estate, Khamardih (C.G.)-492 001 PAN : AABFH5997A .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/s. The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Raipur-1 ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee by : Shri B. Subramanyam, CA Revenue by : Smt. Ila M Parmar, CIT-DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 22.08.2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date of Pronounce…

Ravindra Dnyaneshwr Bhujbal, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-14(5), Pune

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

ITA 1017/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

For Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani

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…

Phoenix Udyog Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. D.C.I.T., Circle-1(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 39/KOL/2023[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Oct 2023AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No.39/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Phoenix Udyog Pvt. Ltd.……….....................................……………....Appellant 9, Vishal Market, West Mukherjee Nagar, New Delhi-110009. [Pan: Aaccp4046N] Vs. Dcit, Circle-1(1), Kolkata.......…..........................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri S. M. Surana, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ankur Goyal, Jcit, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 18, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 18, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 23.12.2022 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Sole Issue Involved In This Appeals Is Relating To The Disallowance Made By The Assessing Officer/Central Processing Centre (Cpc) U/S 36(1)(Va) R.W.S. 2(24)(X) Of The Act On Account Of Delayed Deposit Of Employees’ Contribution To Pf/Esi I.E. After The Due Date As Provided Under The Respective Welfare Enactments.

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

…I.T.A. No.39/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Phoenix Udyog Pvt. Ltd आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ ‘एसएमसी’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH KOLKATA "ी संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी "गर"श अ"वाल लेखा सद"य के सम" , Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member and Shri Girish Agrawal, Accountant Member I.T.A. No.39/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Phoenix Udyog Pvt. Ltd.……….....................................……………....Appellant 9, Vishal Market, West Mukherjee Nagar, New Delhi-110009. [PAN: AACCP4046N] vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Kolkata.......…..........................................…..…....…

Concentrix Services India Private Limited (Formerly Known As Minacs Private Limited, Minacs Limited & Adity Birla Minacs Worldwide Limited ), Mumbai vs. Joint Commissioner of It (OSD)10(2)(2)Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-9(2)(2), Mumbai

ITA 5764/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh TharFor Respondent: Shri Ajit Pal Singh Daia

Section 143(3)Section 144C(3)Section 92(1)Section 92B

…ue is no longer res integra and stands decided against the Assessee and in favour of the Revenue by the judgment of the & ITA No. 5823/Mum/2019 AY 2011-12 & 2012-13 & AY 2013-14 Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case Checkmate Services Private Ltd. v. CIT-1:[2022] 448 ITR 518 (SC)[12-10-2022], wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that where an assessee failed to deposit Employees' Contribution towards Provident Fund and Employees’ State Insurance within due date prescribed in respective statutes, deduction under Section 36(1)(va) of the Act was not allowable. The non-obstante clause contained in Section 43B of t…

Concentrix Services India Private Limited (Formerly Known As Minacs Private Limited, Minacs Limited & Adity Birla Minacs Worldwide Limited ), Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-10(2)(2), Mumbai

ITA 5260/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh TharFor Respondent: Shri Ajit Pal Singh Daia

Section 143(3)Section 144C(3)Section 92(1)Section 92B

Bony Polymers Private Limited, Faridabad vs. DCIT, Circle-5(1), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1566/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Oct 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri M. Balaganeshbony Polymers Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Dcit, Plot No. 77, Sector-6, Circle-5(1), Faridabad, Haryana Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aabcb1594N

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra Jindal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…s DCIT in ITA Nos. 74 & 75 /Del/2022 dated 5.4.2022 in support of his contentions. We find that all these arguments of the assessee had been considered by the recent decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd Vs. CIT reported 448 ITR 518 (SC) which had settled the entire dispute to rest by deciding it in favour of the revenue by observing as under:- “53. The distinction between an employer’s contribution which is its primary liability under law – in terms of Section 36(1)(iv), and its liability to deposit amounts received by it or deducted by it (Section 36(1)(va)) is, thus cruc…

Anytime Securities Services, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-29(1), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1522/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri M. Balaganeshanytime Securities Services, Vs. Acit, Ta-91, Main Okhla Road, Circle029(1), Tughalkabad Extension, New Delhi Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aadfa2570L

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. DR

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

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A” : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Anytime Securities Services, Vs. ACIT, TA-91, Main Okhla Road, Circle029(1), Tughalkabad Extension, New Delhi Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AADFA2570L Assessee by : None Revenue by: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 16/10/2023 Date of pronouncement 18/10/2023 O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: 1. The appeal in ITA No.1522/Del/2023 for AY 2018-19, arises out of the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [h…