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 367,282 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. Bharti Management Services Limited, Mumbai vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 354/BANG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2018-19 M/S. Bharti Management Services The Cit(Appeals), Ltd., (Earlier Known As Bharti Axa Income Tax Department, General Insurance Company Limited), Vs. Delhi. 19Th Floor, 1902 G Block Parinee Crescenzo, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bkc Road, Bandra – East, Mumbai – 400 051. Pan : Aadcb 2008 D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Sowmya Ranjan, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Sankar Ganesh K, Addl. Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 21.06.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.06.2023

For Appellant: Shri. Sowmya Ranjan, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Sankar Ganesh K, Addl. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40A(7)

…bmitted any details regarding payment of approved gratuity fund and further in respect of ESI and PF, he submitted that the issue is covered by the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd., Vs. CIT reported in 448 ITR 518. Therefore, the order of the CIT(A) should be upheld. 6. After hearing both the sides and perusing the material on record and orders of the authorities below, we note that in the case of disallowance regarding payment of Rs.1,32,52,000/-, contribution towards approved gratuity fund, both the parties agreed to remit the issue to the file of the A…

Ansal Housing Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1970/DEL/2020[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Chandra Mohan Gargm/S. Ansal Housing Ltd. Vs. Dcit 606, 6Th Floor, Indra Cpc Prakash, 21, Barakhamba Bengaluru Road, New Delhi – 110001 Pan No. Aaaca 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Gaurav Jain, Adv, Shri Sudarshan Roy, Ar Revenue By Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 11.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.06.2023 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am :

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 40

…upported the order of lower authorities and further submitted that the issue of delayed payment has now been settled by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. and others vs. CIT & others (2022) M/s. Ansal Housing Ltd. vs. DCIT CPC 4 448 ITR 518 (SC) and the Pune Bench of Tribunal in the case of Cemetile Industries (ITA No 693/Pun/2022 order dtd 23.11.2022 had considered various aspects and by a detailed order held that the delayed deposit of employees contribution cannot be allowed as deduction and that the adjustment could even be made in the intimation issued u/s 143(1) of the Act. Sh…

Siddhi Vinayaka Graphics Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. A.D.I.T., CPC, Bengaluru / I.T.O., Circle - 7(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 143/KOL/2023[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Jun 2023AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri P. R. Kothari, FCAFor Respondent: Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

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

…d any subsequent pronouncement of law or retrospective amendment on the concerned issue is not to be considered for such purpose. Accordingly, the subsequent pronouncement of law by Hon'ble Supreme Court judgement in Checkmate Services (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC) is not to be considered for prima facie adjustment u/s. 143(1)(a) for asst. yr. 2020-21 for disallowing payment of employees' contribution to PF/ESI beyond the due date prescribed in respective statute because on the date of filing of ITR by appellant on 30.03.2021, Hon'ble Calcutta High Court (Jurisdictional High Court) judgement in the cas…

Sri Jayajothi and Company Private Limited, Virudhunagar vs. ITO Corporate Circle-2, Madurai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms of our observations hereinabove

ITA 486/CHNY/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.486/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2018-19 V. M/S.Sri Jayajothi & Co. Pvt. Ltd., The Income Tax Officer, 70, Alagai Nagar, Corporate Circle-2, Rajapalayam, Madurai. Virudhunagar District-626 117. [Pan: Aaccs 0542 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.N.Arjun Raj, Ca ""थ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.P.Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21.06.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23.06.2023

For Appellant: Mr.N.Arjun Raj, CAFor Respondent: Mr.P.Sajit Kumar, JCIT

Section 10Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’सी’ !ायपीठ, चे$ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी वी. दुगा" राव, "ाियक सद", एवं *ी अ"ण खोडिपया, लेखा सद+ के सम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.486/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2018-19 v. M/s.Sri Jayajothi & Co. Pvt. Ltd., The Income Tax Officer, 70, Alagai Nagar, Corporate Circle-2, Rajapalayam, Madurai. Virudhunagar District-626 117. [PAN: AACCS 0542 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant by : Mr.N.Arjun Raj, CA ""थ" की ओर से /Respondent by : Mr.P.Saji…

Prabhakar Somappa Pujari, Udupi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Udupi

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

ITA 346/BANG/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Jun 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Sanketh S Nayak, CAFor Respondent: Shri Pavan Kumar,Addl. CIT (DR)

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.345 & 346/Bang/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-19 & 2019-20 Prabhakar Somappa Pujari, Industrial Caterers, Krishna Kripa Complex, The Deputy Behind KSRTC Bus Stand, Udupi, Commissioner of Vs. Adi-udupi B.O, Udupi, Karnataka, Income-tax, India – 576 101. Circle-1, Udupi. PAN No. – ABLPP 7185 R APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Sanketh S Nayak, CA Respondent by : Shri Pavan Kumar,Addl. CIT (DR) Date of Hearing : 15.06.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 22 .06.…

Prabhakar Somappa Pujari, Udupi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Udupi

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

ITA 345/BANG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Sanketh S Nayak, CAFor Respondent: Shri Pavan Kumar,Addl. CIT (DR)

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

Geeta Roy, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-49(4), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 67/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jun 2023AY 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Manpreet Singh Kapoor, CAFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 43B

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: SMC: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND Assessment Year: 2019-20 Geeta Roy, ITO, Ward 49(4), New Delhi C-4C, 310-Janak Puri, New Delhi 110058 PAN AEAPG 7155 C vs. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Manpreet Singh Kapoor, CA For Revenue : Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 06.04.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 22.06.2023 ORDER Per Chandra Mohan Garg:- This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 16.11.2022 of the Ld. NFAC, New Delhi, relating to Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. As per grounds of appeal, the…

Karl Storz Endoscopy India Private Ltd., Delhi vs. JCIT Circle 13(1), Delhi

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

ITA 334/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jun 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Filing Of Its Return Of Income.”

For Appellant: Shri Rishabh Malhota, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Waseem Arshad, CIT DR

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘C’ : NEW DELHI) SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI YOGESH KUMAR US, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.334/Del./2022 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2019-20) Karl Storz Endoscopy India Pvt. Ltd., vs. JCIT, Circle 13 (1), 11th Floor, Dr. Gopal Das Bhawan, Delhi. 28, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi 110 001. (PAN : AZHPS3384D) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Rishabh Malhota, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Waseem Arshad, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 21.06.2023 Date of Order : 22.06.2023 ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : This appeal is preferred by the assessee against th…

Victoria International Private Limited, Kharagpur vs. ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 130/KOL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Jun 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri S. Dutta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. CIT

Section 143(1)Section 3Section 36(1)(va)Section 80J

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2019-20 Victoria International Private Assistant Director of Income Limited Tax, CPC, Bengaluru Ground floor, 27/14, Vs. Malancha Road, Malancha, Nimpura, Kharagpur-721304, West Bengal – 721301 (PAN: AABCV2512N) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : Shri S. Dutta, AR Respondent by : Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. CIT Date of Hearing : 14.06.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 21.06.2023 O R D E R PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by…

Ranbir Singh Sorout, Faridabad vs. ITO, Ward-2(2), Faridabad

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 53/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Delhi21 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Beenu, Sr. DR

Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 37(1)Section 43Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘F’ : NEW DELHI) SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI YOGESH KUMAR US, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.52/Del./2023 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2017-18) ITA No.53/Del./2023 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2018-19) ITA No.54/Del./2023 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2019-20) Ranbir Singh Sorout, vs. ITO, Ward 2 (2), B – 49, Sector 11A, Faridabad. Faridabad – 121 006 (Haryana). (PAN : AZHPS3384D) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : None REVENUE BY : Ms. Beenu, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 19.06.2023 Date of Order : 21.06.2023 ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : These appeals are preferred…

M/S. Ganeshbari Tea Co. (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Central Circle - 2, Guwahati

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

ITA 11/GTY/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati20 Jun 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No.11/Gty/2023 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Goneshbari Tea Company Pvt. Ltd. ………....….........…..........….…… Appellant 4/1, Middleton Street, Shakespear Sarani, Kolkata-700071. [Pan: Aabcg7880Q] Vs. Acit, Central Circle-2, Guwahati….………….…..…...…..…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Sumeet Kumar, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ps Thuingaleng, Acit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 06, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 20, 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 31.10.2022 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal), Guwahati [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. That The Order Dated 31-10-2022 Passed By The Cit(A) U/S 250 Of The Act Is Bad In Law & Liable To Be Quashed.

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “GUWAHATI BENCH, GUWAHATI VIRTUAL HEARING AT 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.11/GTY/2023 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Goneshbari Tea Company Pvt. Ltd. ………....….........…..........….…… Appellant 4/1, Middleton Street, Shakespear Sarani, Kolkata-700071. [PAN: AABCG7880Q] vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2, Guwahati….………….…..…...…..…..…..... Respondent Appearances by: Shri Sumeet Kumar, AR, appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri PS Thuingaleng, ACIT-DR, app…

Magnesita Refractories Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Dy. CIT CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, the the Miscellaneous Application of the Revenue is of the Revenue is allowed, whereas the the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 186/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () M.A. No. 70/Mum/2023 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 186/Mum/2022) Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Ito-10(2)(3), M/S Magnesita Refractories Room No. 212, Aayakar Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, Room No. 604C, Neelkanth Mumbai-400020. Business Park, Opp. Railway Station, Vidyavihar (West) Mumbai-400086. Pan No. Aahcm 1962 H Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2017-2018 M/S Magnesita Refractories Dcit, Centralized Pvt. Ltd., Processing Centre, Vs. Room No. 604C, Neelkanth Bengaluru-560 500. Business Park, Opp. Railway Station, Vidyavihar (West) Mumbai-400086. Pan No. Aahcm 1962 H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Neelam Jadhav/Devang Shah Revenue By : Ms. Richa Gulati, Dr Date Of Hearing : 26/05/2023 : Date Of Pronouncement 20/06/2023

For Appellant: Neelam Jadhav/Devang ShahFor Respondent: Ms. Richa Gulati, DR

Section 254(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “SMC” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) M.A. No. 70/MUM/2023 (Arising out of ITA No. 186/MUM/2022) Assessment Year: 2017-2018 ITO-10(2)(3), M/s Magnesita Refractories Room No. 212, Aayakar Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, Room No. 604C, Neelkanth Mumbai-400020. Business Park, Opp. Railway Station, Vidyavihar (West) Mumbai-400086. PAN No. AAHCM 1962 H Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2017-2018 M/s Magnesita Refractories DCIT, Centralized Pvt. Ltd., Processing Centre, Vs. Room No. 604C, Neelkanth Be…

Kalpesh Synthetics Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 1785/MUM/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Shreekala Pardeshi, Sr.DR

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

…statute, which resulted into making the disallowances/ additions of Rs. 4,24,634/- and Rs. 5,77,460/- respectively for the AYs 2018-19 & 2019-20. Kalpesh Synthetics Pvt. Ltd. 4. 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. For completeness and ready reference, the conclusion drawn by the Hon’ble apex court qua delayed payment towards the E…

Dinesh Industrial Corporation, Gautam Buddha Nagar vs. ITO, Ward-5(1)(1), Gautam Buddha Nagar

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

ITA 45/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Ramanand Roy, AdvFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B” DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.45/DEL/2023 Assessment Year 2018-19 Dinesh Industrial Corporation, Vs. DCIT, CPC-Banglore, C-33, Sector 9, Income Tax Officer, Gautam Buddha Nagar, Ward 5(1)(1), Uttar Pradesh. Gautam Buddha Nagar, Uttar Pradesh. TAN/PAN: AAFFC9282M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Ramanand Roy, Adv. Respondent by: Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 20 06 2023 Date of pronouncement: 20 06 2023 O R D E R PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, A.M.: The captioned…

Bimla Thakur, Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle 43(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 2963/DEL/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediai.T.A. No.2963/Del/2022 Assessment Year 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri P.P. Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr. DR

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B” DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.2963/DEL/2022 Assessment Year 2020-21 Bimla Thakur, Vs. DCI|T, House No. 19C, Gali No. 3, Circle-43(1), Main Sagar Pur, New Delhi-110046. New Delhi. TAN/PAN: AFKPT3673H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri P.P. Singh, Adv. Respondent by: Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 20 06 2023 Date of pronouncement: 20 06 2023 O R D E R PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, A.M.: The captioned appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld…

DCIT, Circle- 10(1), New Delhi vs. Global Green Company Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 7541/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. C. N. Prasaddr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Yogesh Thar, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Mrinal Kumar Das, Sr. DR

Section 37(1)Section 92CSection 92C(2)

…the due date. The AO may examine the exact details of payment of Employee Contribution & Employer Contribution and disallow the amount not paid 11 within the due date as per the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 448 ITR 518. Section 115JB on provisions for Doubtful Debts: 8. It is submitted that the amount of Rs.1,56,84,359/- be corrected to Rs.61,86,982/-. The AO to pass rectification order after verification. 9. All the debts which have been rightly obliterated even though the terminology used was “provision” was directed to be excluded from the purview of compu…