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 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

Analogics Tech India Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 247/HYD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri A. Srinivas, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Shakeer Ahamed, Sr
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 37Section 37(1)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “A”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.अपी.सं / ITA No.247/Hyd/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2018-19) M/s. Analogics Tech India The Deputy Commissioner Limited, Vs. of Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle – 1(1), PAN : AABCA7421P Hyderabad. अपीलार्थीर्थी / Assessee प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent /Assessee by: Shri A. Srinivas, C.A. निर्धारितीती द्वारा /Revenue by: Shri Shakeer Ahamed, Sr. राजस्‍व द्वारा AR ई की तारीखरीख/Date of hearing: 28.08.2023 सुनवाई घोषणा की तारी…

Signotron (India) Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Circle 2(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 374/KOL/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Sept 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2018-19 Signotron (India) Pvt. Ltd. I.T.O. Circle-2(1), Kolkata. Plot-J1-6, Block-Ep, Salt Lake Vs. City, Sector-V, Kolkata- 700091. (Pan: Aaecs3941F) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kallol Mistry, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 86(1)(va)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2018-19 Signotron (India) Pvt. Ltd. I.T.O. Circle-2(1), Kolkata. Plot-J1-6, Block-EP, Salt Lake Vs. City, Sector-V, Kolkata- 700091. (PAN: AAECS3941F) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : Shri Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Kallol Mistry, JCIT, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 06.09.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 08.09.2023 O R D E R PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of…

M/S Chempaka Kindergarten Pvt. Ltd., Trivandrum vs. The CIT (Appeals), Circle 1(1), Thiruvananthapuram

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 791/COCH/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin07 Sept 2023AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am &Shri Manomohan Das, Jm

For Appellant: Smt.Telma Raju, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.J.M.Jamuna Devi, Sr.DR
Section 154Section 2(24)(x)

…(AY) 2019-2020. 2. At the very outset, it was submitted by Smt.Telma Raju, the learned counsel for the assessee, that the assessee’s appeal is squarely covered against it by the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Checkmate Services (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [2022] 448 ITR 518 (SC). The same may accordingly be dismissed. 3. We have heard the parties, and perused the material on record. The only issue in the instant appeal is the disallowance effected u/s. 2(24)(x) r/ws. 36(1)(va), vide order u/s.154, since confirmed in first appeal. The primary facts are not in dispute. The payment of the employees’ contribution to th…

M/S. Unimoni Financial Services Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 490/BANG/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Sept 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri. Srinivas K. P, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Subramanian S, Addl. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

…F Act. 5. Aggrieved, assessee filed an appeal before the First Appellate Authority (FAA). The CIT(A) rejected the claim of the assessee by relying on the judgment Page 3 of 6 of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd., reported in 448 ITR 518 (SC). 6. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), assessee has raised this issue before the Tribunal. The learned AR concedes that the disputed matter has been adjudicated against the tax payer by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd., (supra). However, the learned AR submitted that employees’ contribution to the PF fund wa…

AO, CPC Bengaluru, Karnataka vs. Kamlesh Kumar Singh, Panipat (Haryana)

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

ITA 1458/DEL/2021[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Sept 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Sh. Pradip Kumar Kedia & Sh. Yogesh Kumar Usao Vs. Kamlesh Kumar Singh Cpc House No.112, Near Shiv Deep Bengaluru Public School, Refiney Township Karnataka Road, Vpo Dadlana, Panipat Haryana – 132 140 Pan No. Aadck 5251 H (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND SH. YOGESH KUMAR US, JUDICIAL MEMBER AO Vs. Kamlesh Kumar Singh CPC House No.112, Near Shiv Deep Bengaluru Public School, Refiney Township Karnataka Road, VPO Dadlana, Panipat Haryana – 132 140 PAN No. AADCK 5251 H (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Assessee by Shri Pramod Jain, C.A. Revenue by Ms. Kanti E. Khobragade, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing: 06.09.2023 Date of Pronouncement: 06.09.2023 PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, AM : The captioned appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order of the Ld. Commiss…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-7 vs. Pepsico India Holding Pvt. Ltd

ITA/12/2023HC Delhi05 Sept 2023

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

Section 10Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)

…ident fund and insurance. 8. Mr Puneet Rai, learned senior standing counsel, who appears on behalf of the appellant/revenue, has drawn our attention to the judgment of the Supreme Court in Checkmate Services P Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, [2022] 448 ITR 518 (SC). 8.1 A careful perusal of the said judgment shows, that the Supreme Court has taken a contra view. Therefore, the view taken by the Tribunal would have to be reversed. 9. Mr Deepak Chopra, who appears on behalf of the respondent/assessee, has drawn our attention to paragraph 7 of the impugned order dated 20.06.2022 passed b…

Acro Hr Solutions India Pvt.Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 83/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Sept 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharmaacro Hr Solutions Vs. Acit, India Pvt. Ltd, Circle-1(1), G-10, Hemkunt Delhi Chambers, 89, Nehru Place, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aafca0598M

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri. Girish Kohli, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…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:- “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 fo…

Aruna Gupta, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-52(2), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 228/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharmaaruna Gupta, Vs. Ito, 6715/10, 1St Floor, Ward-52(2), Gali No. 1, Karol Delhi Bagh, Dev Nagar, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Assessee By : None Revenue By: Shri Girish Kohli, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 28/06/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 05/09/2023

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Girish Kohli, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…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:- “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 fo…

Shri Kamlesh Sen, Bhopal vs. The CIT (A) NFAC, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 98/IND/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore05 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanishri Kamlesh Sen Nfac 55, Saluja Complex Delhi Vs. M.P. Nagar-1 Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Revenue) Pan: Bejps 5672C Assessee By Shri Ashish Goyal & Shri N.D. Patwa, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 04.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 05.09.2023

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 246ASection 250Section 34(1)(iv)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…and ESIC. 3. We have heard the Ld. AR as well as Ld. DR and carefully perused the orders of the authorities below. The Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the disallowance by following the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Checkmate Services (P.) Ltd. v. CIT 448 ITR 518(SC) wherein, this issue has been decided in favour of the revenue in Para 51 to 55 as under: “51. The analysis of the various judgments cited on behalf of the assessee i.e.,CIT v. Aimil Ltd. [2010] 188 Taxman 265/321 ITR 508 (Delhi); CIT v. Sabari Enterprises [2008] 298 ITR 141 (Kar.); CIT v. Pamwi Tissues Ltd. [2009] 313 ITR 137 (Bom.); CIT v.…

Bhuneshwar Prasad Sahu, Baloda Bazar, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- Bhatapara, Bhatapara

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed in terms of our observations above

ITA 109/RPR/2023[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Raipur04 Sept 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.109/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20 Bhuneshwar Prasad Sahu Main Road, Raseda, Baloda Bazar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Bayps7721N .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Khapradih, Bhatapara ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)

…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.109/RPR/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20 Bhuneshwar Prasad Sahu Main Road, Raseda, Baloda Bazar, Raipur (C.G.) PAN : BAYPS7721N .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/s. The Income Tax Officer, Khapradih, Bhatapara ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Ravi Agrawal, CA Revenue by : Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 21.08.2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date of Pronouncement :…

Anand Infracon, Raipur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Raipur-1, Raipur

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed regarding our observations above

ITA 100/RPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur04 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.100/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Anand Infracon 502, Dhebar Arcade, Near Kundan Palace, Raipur-492 001 (C.G.) Pan : Aatfm4011A .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Raipur-1 (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Praveen Jain, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Ila M. Parmar, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 36(1)(va)Section 4(7)

…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.100/RPR/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Anand Infracon 502, Dhebar Arcade, Near Kundan Palace, Raipur-492 001 (C.G.) PAN : AATFM4011A .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/s. The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Raipur-1 (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Praveen Jain, CA Revenue by : Smt. Ila M. Parmar, CIT-DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 21.08.2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date of Pronounc…

Meenal Hemanshu Nandola, Pune vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2), Pune

The appeal is ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL

ITA 834/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 834/Pun/2023 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Meenal Hemanshu Nandola 286-A, Shree Ganesh Chambers, Ganesh Peth, Pune Pan: Amzpn6419P . . . . . . . अपऩलधथी / Appellant

For Appellant: Ms Kimaya for Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri R. Y. Balawade
Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

…record in the light of rule 18 of the ITAT Rules, 1963. 7. We note that rival parties have no dispute over legal position as laid down in landmark judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in ‘Checkmate Services P. Ltd. & Ors. Vs CIT & Ors’ reported in 448 ITR 518, wherein the Hon’ble Lordship have categorically held that, where any remittance of employees contribution to specified fund is made after the prescribed due date, disallowance of such remission u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act is inevitable. The appellant without disputing the applicability has set-up this case contesting that the details of remittance…

M/S. Amtex Software Solutions Private Limited, Chennai vs. PCIT Chennai -1, Chennai

The appeal stand dismissed

ITA 678/CHNY/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Aug 2023AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Ms. G. Vardhini (Advocate) - Ld.ARFor Respondent: Ms. Deeptha M.S. (JCIT) - Ld. Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 263Section 40A(7)

…he same, Ld. Pr. CIT held that the issue of Book Profit u/s 115JB requires verification. On the issue of disallowance of PF/ESI, the Ld. Pr. CIT referred to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in bunch of appeals titled as Checkmate Services P. Ltd. Vs CIT (143 Taxmann.com 178). Accordingly the assessment was set aside with a direction to Ld. AO to examine these issues. Aggrieved as aforesaid, the assessee is in further appeal before us. Our findings and Adjudication 7. As noted in preceding para-3, we find that only two issues were identified in complete scrutiny i.e., disallowance u/s 40A(7) and allowance of…

Wings Biotech LLP, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-43(1), Delhi

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

ITA 1492/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Delhi31 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiya & Sh.Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2018-19

Section 10Section 80Section 80I

…of the Act. A similar view was taken by the coordinate Bench in the case of the assessee for A.Y.2017-18 in ITA No.531/Del/2023. 7. We are of the considered view that the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Check Mate Services Private Limited 448 ITR 518 squarely apply on the facts of the case, but at the same time the claim of deduction u/s. 80IC cannot be ignored, therefore, to this extent we direct the AO to consider the claim as per the relevant provisions of the law after affording a reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 8. In the result, the appeal of the asse…

Vishwaranjan Prasad Singh, Bhopal vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangaluru

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 24/IND/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Aug 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanivishwaranjan Prasad Singh Dcit-Cpc Prop World Wide Security Org, Bangalore Vs. H 203, Baghmugalia Extension Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Revenue) Pan: Acpps 7520Q Assessee By Shri S.S. Deshpandey, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 31.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 31.08.2023

Section 139Section 143Section 2(24)(x)Section 34(1)(iv)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ent Fund. 3. We have heard the Ld. AR as well as Ld. DR and carefully perused the orders of the authorities below. The Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the disallowance by following the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Checkmate Services (P.) Ltd. v. CIT 448 ITR 518(SC) wherein, this issue has been decided in favour of the revenue in Para 51 to 55 as under: “51. The analysis of the various judgments cited on behalf of the assessee i.e.,CIT v. Aimil Ltd. [2010] 188 Taxman 265/321 ITR 508 (Delhi); CIT v. Sabari Enterprises [2008] 298 ITR 141 (Kar.); CIT v. Pamwi Tissues Ltd. [2009] 313 ITR 137 (Bom.); CIT v.…

Dipen Kumarpal Parekh, Mumbai vs. NFAC- DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1703/MUM/2022[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr. P.D. Chougule, DR
Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(via)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “D” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) M.A. No. 338/MUM/2023 (Arising out of ITA No. 1703/MUM/2022) Assessment Year: 2019-2020 ITO Ward- 41(3)(1), Dipen Kumarpal Parekh, Room No. 753, 7th floor, G- 603, Patel Niwas, Sainath Vs. Block, Kautilya Bhavan, Road, Malad (West), Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai-400604. Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051. PAN No. AADPP 6112 D Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2019-2020 Dipen Kumarpal Parekh, Assessing Officer National 603, Patel Niwas, Sainath Faceless Centre, New Delh…

ACIT, Circle 10(1), New Delhi vs. M/S. Intercontinental Consultants and Technocrats Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed

ITA 1985/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Delhi30 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharat

For Appellant: Shri P.K. Chadha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Munesh Rajani, Sr. DR
Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…and EPF. We find that the CIT(A) has deleted the disallowance relying upon various judicial decision. However, this quarrel is now settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee in the case of Checkmate Services P. Ltd. 448 ITR 518 wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court held as under: “The analysis of the various judgments cited on behalf of the assessee, 51 CIT v. Aimil Ltd.; CIT v. Sabari Enterprises; CIT v. Pamwi Tissues LM; CIT v. Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sandh Ltd. and Nipso Le Polyfabriks (supra) would reveal that in all these cases, the High Courts principally rel…

Dilip Pathak, Guwahati vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Guwahati

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3/GTY/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati29 Aug 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

…ITA Nos. 2 & 3/GAU/2022 Assessment Years: 2018-2019 & 2019-2020 Dilip Pathak IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA-GUWAHATI ‘e-COURT’, KOLKATA [Virtual Court Hearing] Before Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ) & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member I.T.A. Nos. 2 & 3/GAU/2022 Assessment Years: 2018-2019 & 2019-2020 Dilip Pathak,........................................Appellant C/o. S.N. Ghosh & Associates, Advocates, 2, Garstin Place, 2nd Floor, Suite No. 203, Opp. Hare Street, Kolkata-700001 [PAN:AMFPP6694J] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,....Respondent Circle-2, Guwahati, Aayakar Bhawa…

Dilip Pathak, Guwahati vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Guwahati

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2/GTY/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati29 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

…ITA Nos. 2 & 3/GAU/2022 Assessment Years: 2018-2019 & 2019-2020 Dilip Pathak IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA-GUWAHATI ‘e-COURT’, KOLKATA [Virtual Court Hearing] Before Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ) & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member I.T.A. Nos. 2 & 3/GAU/2022 Assessment Years: 2018-2019 & 2019-2020 Dilip Pathak,........................................Appellant C/o. S.N. Ghosh & Associates, Advocates, 2, Garstin Place, 2nd Floor, Suite No. 203, Opp. Hare Street, Kolkata-700001 [PAN:AMFPP6694J] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,....Respondent Circle-2, Guwahati, Aayakar Bhawa…

M/S. Intellect Bizware Services Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT (A) NFAC, Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee stands dismissed

ITA 1935/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri N. K. Choudhry, Jm

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. H.M. Bhatt, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 34(1)(iv)Section 36Section 36(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…utes, which resulted into making the disallowance/addition of Rs. 15,05,508/- u/s 36(1)(va) read with section 2(24)(x) of the Act. 3 M/s Intellect Bizware Services Pvt. Ltd. 6. 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 payments 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…