How many judgments cite CIT v. AIMIL Ltd.?

1,629 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. AIMIL Ltd. (321 ITR 508), spanning 2010 to 2026.

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

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 36(1)(va), Section 143(1), Section 1961, Section 43B, Section 139(1), Section 154.

CIT v. AIMIL Ltd.

321 ITR 508High Court2010#19 most cited

What is CIT v. AIMIL Ltd. authority for?

Employee contributions to PF and ESIC, deposited beyond the due date under the respective Acts but within the due date for filing the income tax return under Section 139(1), are allowable deductions under Section 36(1)(va). Such disallowance cannot be made during processing under Section 143(1).

1,629

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. AIMIL Ltd. · AIMIL Ltd. · Section 36(1)(va) · Section 43B · employee contribution PF ESIC · delayed deposit provident fund · deposit before 139(1) due date · disallowance 143(1) adjustment · actual payment basis PF ESIC · Section 2(24)(x) · due date for payment of employee contribution

Also reported as

188 Taxmann 265229 CTR 118

Sections most often in play

Section 36(1)(va)Section 143(1)Section 1961 Section 43B Section 139(1)Section 154 Section 2(24)(x)Section 143(1)(a)

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 43(b)section 36(va)section 34(1)(iv)section 3(b)section 43b(b)section 34(1)actual payment basis section 36(1)(iv)section 2(24)(x)section 2(24)section 36(1)(va)section 34

Judgments citing CIT v. AIMIL Ltd.

MYUMGHWA AUTOMOTIVE INDIA PVT. LTD.,KANCHIPURAM vs. ITO, CORPORATE WARD-4(1), CHENNAI

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 2660/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Ms. Divya Abhishek, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. K. Ilayaraja, Addl. CIT

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 270ASection 36(1)(va)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एबी ट" वक", "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एस. आर. रघुनाथा, लेखा सद"य के सम$ BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.:2660/Chny/2025 "नधा%रण वष% / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Myunghwa Automotive India ITO, Private Limited, vs. Corporate Ward -4(1), No.112, Sidadivakkam Village, Chennai. Kanchipuram – 631 560. [PAN:AAFCM-2148-H] (अपीलाथ'/Appellant) (()यथ'/Respondent) अपीलाथ' क* ओर से/Appellant by : Ms. Divya Abhishek, C.A. ()यथ' क* ओर से/Respondent by : Shri.…

MAHIPAL YADAV -THROUGH SUNITA (L/H).,DELHI vs. ITO,WARD 43(1),NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI

In the result, impugned order is modified to the extent of disallowance made u/s

ITA 1659/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं.1659/िद"ी/2025 (िन.व. 2018-19) Mahipal Yadav, Through Sunita Legal Heir, C/O Ca M.R Sahu, House No. 651, 1St Floor, Sector-10A, Nr. G.D Goenka Public School, ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Gurgaon, Haryana 122001 Pan: Abypy-4143-R बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, R. No. 1709, 17Th Floor, E-2, Block Civic Centre, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent New Delhi 110002 अपीलाथ" "ारा/Appellant By : Shri M. R Sahu, Chartered Accountant "ितवादी"ारा/Respondent By : Ms. Sudha Gupta, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 31/07/2025 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : : 27/10/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), 15, Delhi [In Short ‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 31.01.2025, For Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Shri M. R Sahu, Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee Narrating Facts Of The Case Submitted That The Addition Was Made By The Cpc U/S.143(1) Of The Income Tax Act,1961(Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Disallowing Assessee’S Claim U/S.23(1)(Va) Of The Act For Contribution Made Towards To Provident Fund (Pf) &

For Appellant: Shri M. R Sahu, Chartered AccountantFor Respondent: Ms. Sudha Gupta, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 23(1)(va)Section 36(1)(va)

…Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 29.08.2019, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) vide order dated 17.08.2020 allowed assessee’s claim by following decisions of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case CIT vs. AIMIL Limited, 321 ITR 508 and in the case of Pro Interactive Service India P. Ltd. in Income Tax Appeal 983 of 2018 . Thereafter, the assessee realized that while passing the order, the CIT(A) has inadvertently mentioned wrong assessment year in cause title i.e. instead of AY 2018-19, the CIT(A) mentioned assessment year as 2019-20. The assessee filed rectification petiti…

NEERAJ KUMAR SINHA,JAMSHEDPUR vs. ITO WARD-1(1), JAMSHEDPUR

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

ITA 291/RAN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi08 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayneeraj Kumar Sinha, I.T.O., Prop.-M/S Neeraj Engineering, Chota Ward-1(1), Vs. Ghamaria, Saraikela-Kharsawan, Jamshedpur. Jamshedpur-832108 (Jharkhand) Pan No. Bopps 2885 K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 154

…ies towards their contributions, which were made beyond such stipulated period, obviously the assessee was not entitled to claim the deduction from its returns. 1.15 For that the order of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. AIMIL Ltd. 321 ITR 508 vide order dated 23.12.2009 held that if the employees' contribution is not deposited by the due date prescribed under the relevant Acts and is deposited late, the employer not only pays interest on delayed payment but can incur penalties also, for which specific 4 Neeraj Kumar Sinha Vs ITO provisions are made in the Provident Fund Act as well a…

LINEN DESIGN COMPANY PVT LTD,GURGAON vs. ACIT,CIRCLE-13(1), DELHI

ITA 3358/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwallinen Design Company Acit/Dcit, Private Limited, Circle-13(1), Flat No.701, Tower-Ii, Vs. Delhi. Sohna Road, Vipul Greens, Sector-48, Gurgaon (Gurugram)-122018. Pan-Aabcl7123P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ved Jain, Adv. & Ms. Uma Upadhyay, Ca Department By Shri Shyam Manohar Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 22/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26/09/2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Dated 27.03.2025 In Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/154/2024-25/1075116153(1) Passed U/S 154 R.W.S250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act, In Short) For Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Return Of Income Filed By The Assessee Was Processed U/S 143(1) Of The Act Vide Order Dated 06.01.2020 For The Captioned Linen Design Company Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Acit Assessment Year Wherein Disallowance Of Delayed Payment Of Employees’ Contribution Towards The Esi/Epf Of Rs.20,17,444/- Was Made.

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250

…de. 3. Against such order, an appeal was filed by the assessee which was allowed by ld. Ld. CIT(A) in Appeal No. CIT(A), Delhi-5/10571/2019-20 vide order dated 10.09.2020 by following the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. AIMIL Ltd. 321 ITR 508 and of Pro Interactive Service (India) Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 983/2018. Thereafter, Revenue filed an application u/s 154 of the Act before ld. CIT(A) for rectification of the aforesaid order based on the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT, [2022] 143 taxmann.com 178 (SC) wherein the hon’ble Suprem…

TANGERINE DESIGN PVT LTD,GURGAON vs. ACIT,CIRCLE-25(1), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3356/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalm/S Tangerine Design Private Cpc-Itr Limited, (On Behalf Of Ao) Plot No.9, Sector-4, Imt Vs. Nfac, Ao Range Code-46, Manesar, Gurgaon, C.R. Building, Haryana-122050. New Delhi-110002. Pan-Aaect6475H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Department By Shri Shyam Manohar Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 22/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 22/09/2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Dated 24.04.2025 In Appeal No. Cit(A), Delhi-9/10044/2020-21 Arising Out Of The Order Passed U/S 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 17.10.2019 For Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. In The Present Appeal Assessee Has Challenged The Order Of Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Wherein The Ld. Cit(A) Confirmed The Addition Made On Account Of Delayed Payment Of Employee’S Contribution Towards Esi/Epf. Tangerine Design Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Acit 3. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee.

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

…cal glitches, therefore, the payments were shown delayed. Further before Ld. CIT(A) assessee stated that Tangerine Design Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT based on the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of AIMIL Limited vs. CIT reported in [2010] 188 Taxmann 265, disallowance made in its own case in AY 2015-16 was deleted by ld. CIT(A) therefore, it was requested for the deletion of the disallowance made. It is further seen that the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal and confirmed the disallowance by following the order of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. [2022] 143…

SUDHAKAR ARORA,DELHI vs. ADIT, CPC, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 4584/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2018-19]

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

…CIT (2022) 218 DTR 401 while deciding this issue has observed at Para 51 to 54 held as under:- "51. The analysis of the various judgments cited on behalf of the assessee i.e., CIT v. AIMIL Ltd. &Ors. (2010) 229 CTR (Del) 418 : (2010) 35 DTR (Del) 68 : (2010) 321 ITR 508 (Del), (Delhi High Court); CIT v. Sabari Enterprises (2007) 213 CTR (Kar) 269 : (2008) 2 DTR (Kar) 394 : (2008) 298 ITR 141 (Kar) (Karnataka High Court).; CIT v. Pamwi Tissues Ltd. (2008) 215 CTR (Bom) 150 : (2008) 3 DTR (Bom) 66 : (2009) 313 ITR 137 (Bom) (Bombay High Court); CIT vs. Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sangh Ltd. (2014) 265 CTR (Raj)…

PRIME COMFORT PRODUCTS (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CPC, BENGALURU

In the result, this assessee’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1262/DEL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: Shri J.P. Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)Section 40

…mployees, deposited beyond the due date as per PF and ESIC Act but within the time allowed to file the ITR u/s. 139(1), more so as law laid down in PCIT vs. Pro Interactive Service India Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 983/2018 dated 10.09.2018 (DHC) and CIT vs. Aimil Ltd. 321 ITR 508 (DHC) while processing the return u/s. 143(1). 2.1 That under the facts and circumstances, the disallowance u/s. 36(1) (va) of Rs. 12,88,983/- for PF and ESIC contribution of employees deposited beyond the due date as per PF and ESCI Act but within the time allowed to file the ITR is outside the scope of addition / adjustment while processing the…

SHRI JAGDISH KUMAR GULIA,BHOPAL vs. THRE ASSTT.DIRECTORE OF INCOME TAX ,CPC, BENGALURU

In the result, this appeal is partly allowed

ITA 245/IND/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore09 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 260ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)

…nd proviso to Section 43B- was introduced to ensure timely payments were made by the employer to the concerned fund (EPF, ESI, etc.) and avoid the mischief of employers retaining amounts for long periods. That Commissioner of Income-Tax Vs. Aimil Ltd., [2010] 321 ITR 508 (Delhi High Court). Parliament intended to retain the separate character of these two amounts, is evident from the use of different language. Section 2(24)(x) too, deems amount received from the employees (whether the amount is received from the employee or by way of deduction authorized by the Page 8 of 13 Shri Jagdish Kumar Gulia I.T.A. No. 24…

M/S DAULATARAM ENGINEERING SERVICES P.LTD,MANDIDEEP vs. THE ADIT/CPC , BANGALORE

In the result, this appeal is dismissed

ITA 244/IND/2023[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Indore08 May 2025AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 234ASection 260ASection 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…nd proviso to Section 43B- was introduced to ensure timely payments were made by the employer to the concerned fund (EPF, ESI, etc.) and avoid the mischief of employers retaining amounts for long periods. That Commissioner of Income-Tax Vs. Aimil Ltd., [2010] 321 ITR 508 (Delhi High Court). Parliament intended to retain the separate character of these two amounts, is evident from the use of different language. Section 2(24)(x) too, deems amount received from the employees (whether the amount is received from the employee or by way of deduction authorized by the statute) as income - it is the character of the amou…

SUCH MEDIA PUBLICATION P LTD ,CIT (A) NFAC DELHI vs. NFAC DELHI, DELHI

In the result, this appeal is dismissed

ITA 66/IND/2022[AY 2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Indore08 May 2025

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 36(1)(va)

…nd proviso to Section 43B- was introduced to ensure timely payments were made by the employer to the concerned fund (EPF, ESI, etc.) and avoid the mischief of employers retaining amounts for long periods. That Commissioner of Income-Tax Vs. Aimil Ltd., [2010] 321 ITR 508 (Delhi High Court). Parliament intended to Page 8 of 12 Such Media Publication I.T.A. No. 66/Ind/2022 Assessment Year -2019-20 retain the separate character of these two amounts, is evident from the use of different language. Section 2(24)(x) too, deems amount received from the employees (whether the amount is received from the employee or by w…

LATE SMT. DAYAWANTI DEVI,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, this assessee’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1262/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: Shri J.P. Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)Section 40

M/S VARSHA CONSTRUCTION,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), RAIPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 5/RPR/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur22 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 5/Rpr/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2019-20) M/S Varsha Construction, V The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Second Floor-25, 26, Millenium Plaza, S Tax, Circle-1(1), Central Revenue Raipur-492 001, Chhattisgarh Building, Civil Lines, Raipur, C.G.. Pan: Aaefv 8399 M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) . (""थ" / Respondent) . िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee By : Mr. Sakshi Gopal Aggarwal, Ca राज" की ओर से /Revenue By : Smt. Tarannum Verma, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 21.01.2025 : 22.01.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Mr. Sakshi Gopal Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Tarannum Verma, Sr. DR

Section 139Section 143(1)Section 249(3)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 44A

…n the affirmative and upholding the order of the tribunal qua the aforesaid aspect dismissed the appeal filed by the revenue. Also, we find that a similar view had been arrived at by various Hon’ble High Courts, as under :- i. CIT Vs. Amil Ltd reported (2010) 321 ITR 508 (Delhi High Court) ii. CIT Vs. Hemla Embroidery Mills (P) Ltd. (2014) 366 ITR 167 (P&H) iii. Bihar State Warehousing Corporation Ltd.Vs. CIT 386 ITR 410 (Patna) iv. Sagun Foundary Pvt. Ltd Vs. CIT 145 DTR 265 (All) v. CIT Vs. Mark Auto Industries (2008) 358 ITR 43 (P&H) vi. CIT Vs. Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd (2014) 363 ITR 307 (Raj) vii. Essa…

SHREE SHIVAM ATTIRES PVT. LTD.,DURG vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), BHILAI

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

ITA 111/RPR/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur17 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 111/Rpr/2021 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2018-19)

For Appellant: Shri Yash Jain, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Anubhaa Tah Goel, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

….2022}, wherein at paragraphs 51 to 54, it was observed as under: 9 Shree Shivam Attires Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT, Circle-2(1), Bhilai “51. The analysis of the various judgments cited on behalf of the assessee i.e., Commissioner of Income-Tax v. Aimil Ltd. [2010] 321 ITR 508 (Delhi High Court); Commissioner of Income-Tax and another v. Sabari Enterprises [2008] 298 ITR 141 (Karnataka High Court).; Commissioner of Income Tax v. Pamwi Tissues Ltd. [2009] 313 ITR 137 (Bombay High Court).; Commissioner of Income-Tax, Udaipur v. Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sandh Ltd. [2013] 35 taxmann.com 616 (Rajasthan High Court) and…

BIRD EXECUJET AIRPORT SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 4(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1017/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Dec 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. DR

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)Section 38

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK, JUDICIALMEMBER ITA No.1010/DEL/2023 (Assessment Year : 2019-20) Bird Worldwide Flight Service Mumbai Pvt. Ltd., vs. ACIT, Circle 4(2), E-9, Connaught Hose, New Delhi. Connaught Place, New Delhi – 110 001. (PAN: AAGCB5959C) Bird Execujet Airport Services Pvt. Ltd., vs. ACIT, Circle 4 (2), E-9, Connaught Hose, New Delhi. Connaught Place, New Delhi – 110 001. (PAN: AACCB7218E) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Tarandeep Singh, Advocate Shri Sandeep Yadav, Advocate REVENUE…

BIRD WORLDWIDE FLIGHT SERVICE MUMBAI PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1010/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Dec 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. DR

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)Section 38

BIRD WORLDWIDE FLIGHT SERVICE MUMBAI PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 4(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1009/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. DR

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)Section 38

DCIT CIRCLE 27(1), NEW DELHI vs. UNITED DRILLING TOOLS LTD. , NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5913/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Before Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 36(1)(va)

…se the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in deleting the disallowance of late deposit of ESI/PF of Rs. 17,93,995/- made by the AO u/s 36(1)(va) of the I.T Act 1961, by relying upon the judgment of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. AMIL Limited [2010] 321 ITR 508 [DEL] without appreciating the judgement given by the Hon'ble High Courts in the case of CITVs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation [2014] 366 ITR 170 [GUJ] and CIT, Cochin Vs Merchem Ltd. [2015] 280 CTR 381 [Kerala] and CBDT's Circular No. 22/2015 dated 17.12.2015." 2 DCIT Vs. United Drilling Tools Ltd. 2. Whether on facts and in the circ…

EBRO INDIA PVT.LTD. ,DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-7(1), DELHI

In the result, the ground no 4 raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1291/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Delhi09 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 68

…position, repeated the disallowance. 81. In this regard, it is respectfully submitted that the aforesaid issue is squarely covered in favour of the appellant by the following judgements:  CIT v. AlomExtrustions Ltd.: 319 ITR 306 (SC)  CIT vs. AIMIL Limited: 321 ITR 508 (Del.)  CIT v. Dharmendra Sharma: 297 ITR 320 (Del.)  Pr. CIT vs. Pro Interactive Service (India) Pvt. Ltd. [ITA 983/2018; decided on 10.09.2018] (Del. HC)  Pr. CIT vs. Planman Consulting Pvt. Ltd. [ITA 1221/2018; decided on 02.11.2018] (Del. HC)  Spectrum Consultants India (P) Ltd. v. CIT: 215 Taxman 597 (Kar.)  CIT v. Kichha Sugar Company…

AVIAXPERT PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD 3(1), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 87/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.87/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 बनाम Avia Xpert Pvt. Ltd. Ito, E-178, East Of Kailash, Vs. Ward 3(1), New Delhi. C.R. Building, I.P. Estate, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaica7960L अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 154(3)Section 36(1)(va)

…ws expressed by the Hon’ble High Courts on the said issue. Ld. Counsel submits that the said issue was decided in favour of the assessee by eight Hon’ble High Courts including the jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT Vs. AIMIL Ltd. (2010) 321 ITR 508. Similarly, the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ghatge Patil Transport Ltd. (2014) 368 ITR 749 and the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Sangam Foundary Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT 145 DTR I.T.A.No.87/Del/2024 265 (2017) were in favour of the assessee. Therefore, it is submitted that as on 15/06/2019 the said issue was certa…

GUARDIAN INDIA OPERATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. PCIT 1, CHENNAI

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

ITA 842/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member), SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri. Ashik ShahFor Respondent: Shri. V. Nandakumar, IRS,CIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…conditions required for a valid revisionary proceeding i.e., order being erroneous is not fulfilled, the Assessee humbly submits that the impugned order shall remain valid and not be set aside. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of AIMIL Limited v. CIT 321 ITR 508 allowed the claim of the Assessee in respect of deduction of employees contribution to PF/ESI paid before date of filing income-tax return by noting as under:- ...if the employees contribution is not deposited by the due date prescribed under the relevant IT Acts and is deposited late, the employer not only prays interest on delayed payment but c…

Showing 1–20 of 1,629 · Page 1 of 82

...