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 367,154 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

Axiom Energy Conversion Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 33/HYD/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Jan 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2019-2020 Axiom Energy Conversion Vs. Dy. C.I.T. Ltd, Hyderabad Circle 1(1) Pan:Aacca0120E Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri M.V. Anil Kumar, Ca Revenue By: Shri Kumar Aditya, Dr Date Of Hearing: 23/01/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 24/01/2023 Order Per R.K. Panda, A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 11/11/2022 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac Delhi, Relating To A.Y.2019-2020. 2. Although A Number Of Grounds Have Been Raised By The Assessee, However, These All Relate To The Order Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac In Sustaining The Addition Of Rs.17,55,091/- On Account Of Delayed Payment Of Employees’ Contribution To Pf & Esi.

For Appellant: Shri M.V. Anil Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, DR

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

…ch order of the learned CIT (A) the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides and perused the record. We find the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services (P) Ltd vs. CIT reported in 143 Taxmann.com 178 has held that the employees’ contribution to PF & ESI to the extent it is not paid within due date prescribed under the PF Act is not allowable u/s 36(1)(va) of the I.T. Act. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has further held that the provisions of section 43B would not be applied to the provisions of section 36(1)(va) of the Act in respect of Em…

G S Build Estate P. Ltd., Jaipur vs. ITO, WD-6(2), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 377/JPR/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Jan 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Due Date Of Filing Of Return & By Not Following The Binding Decision Of Jurisdictional High Court Of Rajasthan That If The Employees Contribution Is Deposited Before Due Date, No Disallowance Could Be Made U/S 36(1)(Va) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Surendra Shah, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Monish Choudhary, JCIT-DR

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

…s been confirmed by the ld. CIT(A). It is not imperative to repeat the facts of the case and the case laws cited by both the parties. The Bench has observed that the recently the Hon’ble Supreme has opined in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. vs CIT-1, 143 Taxmann.com 178 (SC)/Civil Appeal No. 2833 of 2016 held that the provision of Section 43B of the Act shall not apply to employee’s contribution to PF/ESI and the due date specified u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act shall apply for determination of deductibility of employee’s contribution to PF/ESI. The relevant portion of the Judgement of Hon’ble Supreme in the c…

ACIT-13(1) (2), Mumbai vs. Oommen Chackalyil Chacko, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2571/MUM/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jan 2023AY 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Dilip K. ShahFor Respondent: None

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

…Tribunal in the case of Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Maharashtra Tourism Development Corporation Ltd. [ITA No. 6426/Mum/2017, dated 27.07.2021]. However, recently, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has, in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT-1: 143 Taxmann.com 178 (SC)/ Civil Appeal No. 833 of 2016, held that the provision of Section 43B of the Act shall not apply to employees contribution to PF/ESI, and the due date specified under Section 36(1)(va) of the Act shall apply for determination of deductibility of employees’ contribution to PF/ESI. Thus, the decision of the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal…

M/S Premier Irrigation Adritec (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir-11(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 387/KOL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 2(24)Section 250Section 3Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ ‘सी’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C”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.387/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/s Premier Irrigation Adritec (P) Ltd.….........…..................….……Appellant 17/1C, Alipore Road, Niharika, Kolkata-700027. [PAN: AAFCM4800Q] vs. ACIT, Circle-11(1), Kolkata...…..……....……........…...…...…..…..... Respondent Appearances by: Shri A. K. Tibrewal, FCA, appeared on behalf of the appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas,…

Randhir Rana, Ballabhgarh vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Faridabad

In the result, appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 2660/DEL/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jan 2023AY 2020-21

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Assessment Year : 2020-21 Randhir Rana Vs. ITO C/o. Advocate-Vijay Ward – 2(1), Kumar Gupta, Opp. Jain Faridabad Mandir, Main Bazar, Ballabgarh, Haryana-04 PAN No. ABSPR 8764 K (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Assessee by Shri Vijay Kumar Gupta, Adv. Revenue by Shri Om Prakash, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing: 15.12.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 19.01.2023 ORDER PER ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM: This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi, No. dated 2…

Krishna Prakashan Media Pvt Ltd, Uttar Pradesh vs. ITO, Ward 1(1)(3), Uttar Pradesh

In the result, appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 2168/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jan 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi(Assessment Year : 2019-20 Krishna Prakashan Media Vs. Ito Pvt. Ltd., Ward – 1(1)(3), 11, Krishna House Uttar Pradesh Shivaji Road Meerut, Meerut-250 001 Pan No. Aaack 9668 B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By --None-- Revenue By Shri Om Prakash, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 15.12.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.01.2023 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi, No. Dated 01.08.2022 In Din & Order Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/1044403913(1), Relating To The A.Y. 2019-20 Passed Under Section 250 Of The I.T. Act, 1961. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case As Culled Out From The Material On Record Are As Under:- Krishna Prakashan Media Pvt. Ltd Vs. Ito 2

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

…lowance u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act is called for. 7. Before me, Learned DR supported the order of lower authorities and submitted that in view of the decisions of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. and others vs. CIT & others (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC) no interference to the order of lower authorities is called for. 8. I have heard the Learned DR and perused the material on record. The issue in the present ground is with respect to the disallowance u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act on account of delayed deposit of employees’ contribution of PF/ESI. It is an undisputed fact that the amount of PF/ES…

M/S. Nirmal Enviro Solutions Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals filed by different assessees are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1154/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Jan 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojarishri Panati Vidyanath Reddy Vs Acit, Circle - 4(3)(1) 10, 32Nd Main, 5Th Cross Bengaluru Dollars Colony, Btm Layout 1St Stage, Bengaluru 560068 Pan – Afmpr3580F (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Nirmal Enviro Solutsions P. Ltd. Vs Acit, Circle - 3(1)(1) 26, 9Th Cross, 16Th Main Bengaluru Btm Layout, 1St Stage Bengaluru 560068 Pan – Aadcn1064H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Miss Sunaiana Bhatia, Ca Revenue By: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel Date Of Hearing: 18.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.01.2023 O R D E R Per: Chandra Poojari, A.M.

For Appellant: Miss Sunaiana Bhatia, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel

Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 36Section 36(1)(va)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENGALURU (SMC) “C” BENCH, BENGALURU Before Shri Chandra Poojari, Accountant Member Shri Panati Vidyanath Reddy vs ACIT, Circle - 4(3)(1) 10, 32nd Main, 5th Cross Bengaluru Dollars Colony, BTM Layout 1st Stage, Bengaluru 560068 PAN – AFMPR3580F (Appellant) (Respondent) M/s. Nirmal Enviro Solutsions P. Ltd. vs ACIT, Circle - 3(1)(1) 26, 9th Cross, 16th Main Bengaluru BTM Layout, 1st Stage Bengaluru 560068 PAN – AADCN1064H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Miss Sunaiana Bhatia, CA Revenue by: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel Date of hearing: 18.01.2023 Date of pronoun…

Naguttu Bhavani, Bangalore vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-5(3)(5), Bangalore

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

ITA 1152/BANG/2022[2019]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore18 Jan 2023

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: --- None ---For Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Baseganni, Addl.CIT-DR

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES “C”, BANGALORE Before Shri George George K, JM & Ms.Padmavathy S, AM ITA No.1151/Bang/2022 : Asst.Year 2018-2019 ITA No.1152/Bang/2022 : Asst.Year 2019-2020 Smt.Nalguttu Bhavani The Income Tax Officer Mahadevpura Post, Hoodi Ward 5(3)(5) v. Thigalarapalaya, Whitefield Road Bangalore. Bangalore North Bengaluru – 560 048. PAN : APAPB3521L. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : --- None --- Respondent by : Smt.Priyadarshini Baseganni, Addl.CIT-DR Date of Pronouncement : 18.01.2023 Date of Hearing : 18.01.2023 O R D E R Per George George K, JM : These appeals…

Naguttu Bhavani, Bangalore vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-5(3)(5), Bangalore

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

ITA 1151/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore18 Jan 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: --- None ---For Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Baseganni, Addl.CIT-DR

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

Sri Panati Vidyanath Reddy, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(3)(1), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals filed by different assessees are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1148/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Jan 2023AY 2019-20

For Appellant: Miss Sunaiana Bhatia, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel

Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 36Section 36(1)(va)

Subramanya Karthik, Bhadravathi vs. ITO, Ward- 1 & Tps, Shimoga

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

ITA 1142/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Jan 2023AY 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri I. Dinesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENGALURU (SMC) “A” BENCH, BENGALURU Before Shri Chandra Poojari, Accountant Member Shri Subramanya Karthik vs The Income Tax Officer 6/252, Sri Dahanalakshmi Ward - 1 & TPS Enterprises, Paper Town Shri Gurunarasimha Krupa Bhadravathi 577302 1 Stage, Vinobanagar PAN – AUUPK7121J Shimoga 577204 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri I. Dinesh, Advocate Revenue by: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel Date of hearing: 18.01.2023 Date of pronouncement: 18.01.2023 O R D E R Per: Chandra Poojari, A.M. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the CIT(A)/N…

Sri. P. Harshavardhana Reddy, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1016/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Jan 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri, S.V. Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Baseganni, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 143(1)Section 34(1)(iv)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND Ms. PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment year : 2018-19 Shri P. Harshavardhana Reddy, Vs. The Assistant Director No.401/4, 14th Main, of Income Tax, CPC, Venkateshwara Layout, Madiwala, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 068. PAN: AEBPR 8378D APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri, S.V. Ravishankar, Advocate Respondent by : Smt. Priyadarshini Baseganni, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 12.01.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 17.01.2023 O R D E R Per Padmavathy S., Accountant Member This appe…

Fil India Business & Research Services P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. Dc, Circle-7(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1358/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jan 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Chandra Mohan Gargfil India Business & Vs. Dc Research Services P. Ltd., Circle – 7(1) Private Studio – New Delhi Ncr/Ac/Ps/00/010B, Ground Floor, Worldmark 1, Asset Area 11, Aerocity, Hospitality District, Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi-110 002 Pan : Aabcf 1572 C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri K. M. Gupta, Adv. Shri Rishabh Malhotra, A.R. & Shri Bhavya Gupta, C.A. Revenue By Shri Amaresh Singh, Cit-D.R. Date Of Hearing: 21.12.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 17.01.2023 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am :

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(2)Section 144C(5)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…mount of Rs.1,71,351/- there was a delay on the part of the assessee in depositing the aforesaid employees’ contribution and therefore in view of the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. and others vs. CIT & others (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC) the amount of Rs.1,71,351/- be disallowed and the balance addition be deleted. 6. Learned DR on the other hand supported the order of lower authorities and objected to the additional evidences filed but however stated that if the additional evidences are admitted, the same be sent back to lower authorities for necessary verification. 7. We…

Mgi Infra Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-16(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is 11

ITA 6500/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jan 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhary

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri Jeetender Chand

Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

…ed DR supported the order of lower authorities and further submitted that the addition made by AO needs to be upheld in view of the recent decision of Hon’ble Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. and others vs. CIT & others (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC). 9. We have heard the learned DR and perused the material available on record. The issue in the present ground is with respect to the disallowance of delayed deposit of employee’s contribution of PF & ESI. We find that Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. (supra) has held that the contribution by the employees t…

Tiberwala Electronics Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT Circle -2(2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 425/HYD/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Jan 2023AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri KPRR Murthy

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 246ASection 249(3)Section 36(1)(va)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri R.K. Panda, Accountant Member AND Shri Laliet Kumar, Judicial Member ITA Nos.424 & 425/Hyd/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 and 2019-20 Tibrewala Electronics Limited, Vs. DCIT, Circle 2(2), 6-56/2/40, Bombay Highway, Hyderabad. Balanagar, Hyderabad. PAN : AAACT5268J. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: None Revenue by: Shri KPRR Murthy Date of hearing: 16.01.2023 Date of pronouncement: 16.01.2023 O R D E R PER BENCH : The appeals of the assessee for A.Ys. 2017-18 and 2019-20 arises from the separate orders of Commissioner of Inco…

Tiberwala Electronics Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT Circle -2(2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 424/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri KPRR Murthy

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 246ASection 249(3)Section 36(1)(va)

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

ITA - 12 / 2023HC Delhi12 Jan 2023

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

…on 27/03/2026 at 12:33:31 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…

Soltek Insolation P. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-7(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 285/KOL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jan 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2019-20 Soltek Insolation Pvt. Ltd. Ito, Ward-7(1), Kolkata C/O. S.N. Ghosh & Associates, Advocates, 2, Garstin Place, 2Nd Vs. Floor, Suite No. 203, Off Hare Street, Kolkata-700001. (Pan: Aatcs 0007 M) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Advocate Revenue By : Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 03.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.01.2023 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 22.04.2022 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Assessee Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “I. For That On A Proper Interpretation Of The Scope & Ambit Of The Provisions Of Section 43B Read With S. 36(1)(Va) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – Nfac Erred In Upholding The Action Of The Ld. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cpc In Resorting To The Impugned Disallowance Of Rs. 42,35,172/- In The Instant Case & The Purported Finding On That Behalf Is Absolutely Arbitrary, Unreasonable & Perverse.

For Appellant: Shri Somnath Ghosh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT, DR

Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA BENCH “C”, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI SONJOY SARMA, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2019-20 Soltek Insolation Pvt. Ltd. ITO, Ward-7(1), Kolkata C/o. S.N. Ghosh & Associates, Advocates, 2, Garstin Place, 2nd Vs. Floor, Suite No. 203, Off Hare Street, Kolkata-700001. (PAN: AATCS 0007 M) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Advocate Revenue by : Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT, DR Date of Hearing : 03.11.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 12.01.2023 O R D E R PER SONJOY SARMA, JM: The presen…

Bharath Industrial Corporation, Bangalore vs. ACIT, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1046/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jan 2023AY 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri AbhijeetFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel (DR.)

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC-A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1046/Bang/2022) Assessment Year: 2019-20 Bharath Industrial Corporation Asst. Director of Income Tax , No. 48/D, 156/2, 5th CPC, Main Road, Prakash Nagar, Bangalore Banglore , Vs. 560 021 PAN No. AABFB2718B APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Abhijeet Respondent by : Shri Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel (DR.) Date of Hearing : 20.12.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 10.01.2023 O R D E R 1. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed return of income on 31.10.2019 declaring income from…

ACIT, Circle-49(1), Delhi vs. Aero Club, Delhi

In the result, all the three captioned appeals of the

ITA 2293/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2023AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Jain, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Maninder Kaur, Sr. DR

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

…on and the contribution has been deposited beyond the date stipulated under the relevant Fund Act. 5. Though the quarrel is no more res integra, as it has been settled by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt Ltd 143 Taxmann.com 178. But, before us, the decision of the co-ordinate bench at Mumbai has been placed in the case of PR Packaging Service in ITA No. 2376/MUM/2022 and it has been seriously argued that the co-ordinate bench has considered the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and yet decided the quarrel in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.…