CIT v. Alom Extrusions Ltd.

319 ITR 306Supreme Court of India2009#31 most cited

What is CIT v. Alom Extrusions Ltd. authority for?

A proviso inserted into a section to remedy unintended consequences, make the section workable, or supply an obvious omission must be read retrospectively in operation to give effect to the section as a whole.

1,344

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 383,061 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Alom Extrusions Ltd. · Alom Extrusions · Section 36(1)(va) · Section 43B · Section 2(24)(x) · retrospective amendment · proviso interpretation · unintended consequences · employee contribution PF ESI · deduction allowance

Also reported as

1 SCC 489

Sections most often in play

Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 40(a)(ia)Section 50C
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 2(24)(x)section 36(1)(va)section 43bsection 2(24)section 43section 36(1)section 36section 139(1)section 139section 143(1)section 13prescribed

Judgments citing CIT v. Alom Extrusions Ltd.

Samadhiya Infratech Private Limited, Shakarpur vs. AO Ward 24(1), ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1785/DEL/2021[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Delhi14 Sept 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No. 1785/Del/2021 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: C. AFor Respondent: [JCIT] - Sr. D. R
Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…igh Court in the case of CIT Vs. AIMIL Ltd. 321 ITR 508. Ratio of this decision squarely applies to the facts of the assessee’s cases. Reliance was also placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. M/s. Alom Extrusions Limited (2009) 319 ITR 306 (SC). 5. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M.M. Aqua Technologies Ltd. Vs. CIT (supra) held that retrospective provision in a Tax Act which is for the removal of doubts cannot be presumed to be retrospective even where such language is used if it alters or changes the law as it earlier stood. The Hon’ble Supreme Court also observed that t…

Sunvisors India Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. Circle-24(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1725/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Delhi14 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No. 1725/Del/2021 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. Sunvisors India Pvt. Ltd., Dcit, Cpc, बनाम 419, World Trade Centre, Vs. Circle : 24 (2) Barakhamba Lane, Connaught Place, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 001. Pan No. Aaacs2016B अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Respondent

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: [JCIT] - Sr. D. R
Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…Vs. AIMIL Ltd. 321 ITR 508. Ratio of this decision squarely applies to the 2 I.T.A. No. 1725/Del/2021 facts of the assessee’s cases. Reliance was also placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. M/s. Alom Extrusions Limited (2009) 319 ITR 306 (SC). 5. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M.M. Aqua Technologies Ltd. Vs. CIT (supra) held that retrospective provision in a Tax Act which is for the removal of doubts cannot be presumed to be retrospective even where such language is used if it alters or changes the law as it earlier stood. The Hon’ble Supreme Court also observed that t…

Sigma Research and Consulting Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-23(4), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1572/DEL/2021[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Delhi14 Sept 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No. 1572/Del/2021 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: C. AFor Respondent: Ms. Rajeshwari R
Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…igh Court in the case of CIT Vs. AIMIL Ltd. 321 ITR 508. Ratio of this decision squarely applies to the facts of the assessee’s cases. Reliance was also placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. M/s. Alom Extrusions Limited (2009) 319 ITR 306 (SC). 5. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M.M. Aqua Technologies Ltd. Vs. CIT (supra) held that retrospective provision in a Tax Act which is for the removal of doubts cannot be presumed to be retrospective even where such language is used if it alters or changes the law as it earlier stood. The Hon’ble Supreme Court also observed that t…

P and G Enterprises Private Ltd., Delhi vs. Circle-19(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1562/DEL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Sept 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No. 1562/Del/2021 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: C. AFor Respondent: [JCIT] - Sr. D. R
Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…igh Court in the case of CIT Vs. AIMIL Ltd. 321 ITR 508. Ratio of this decision squarely applies to the facts of the assessee’s cases. Reliance was also placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. M/s. Alom Extrusions Limited (2009) 319 ITR 306 (SC). 5. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M.M. Aqua Technologies Ltd. Vs. CIT (supra) held that retrospective provision in a Tax Act which is for the removal of doubts cannot be presumed to be retrospective even where such language is used if it alters or changes the law as it earlier stood. The Hon’ble Supreme Court also observed that t…

Shri Krishna Manpower, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Ward-4(2), Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1476/DEL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No. 1476/Del/2021 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Krishna Manpower, Income Tax Officer, बनाम House No. 212, Ward : 4 (2) Vs. Near Signature Tower, Gurgaon. Saini Khera, Gurgaon – 122 001. Haryana. Pan No. Abffs3412E अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Respondent

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar [CIT]–DR; &
Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…Vs. AIMIL Ltd. 321 ITR 508. Ratio of this decision squarely applies to the 2 I.T.A. No. 1476/Del/2021 facts of the assessee’s cases. Reliance was also placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. M/s. Alom Extrusions Limited (2009) 319 ITR 306 (SC). 5. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M.M. Aqua Technologies Ltd. Vs. CIT (supra) held that retrospective provision in a Tax Act which is for the removal of doubts cannot be presumed to be retrospective even where such language is used if it alters or changes the law as it earlier stood. The Hon’ble Supreme Court also observed that t…

Appt Fashion, New Delhi vs. DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1294/DEL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No. 1294/Del/2021 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 Appt Fashion, Dcit, C-736, 2Nd Floor, बनाम Cpc, New Friends Colony, Vs. New Delhi – 110 065. Bengaluru. Pan No. Aarfa0101H अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Kumar Singla, C. AFor Respondent: Shri Kanav Bali, Sr. D. R
Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…igh Court in the case of CIT Vs. AIMIL Ltd. 321 ITR 508. Ratio of this decision squarely applies to the facts of the assessee’s cases. Reliance was also placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. M/s. Alom Extrusions Limited (2009) 319 ITR 306 (SC). 5. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M.M. Aqua Technologies Ltd. Vs. CIT (supra) held that retrospective provision in a Tax Act which is for the removal of doubts cannot be presumed to be retrospective even where such language is used if it alters or changes the law as it earlier stood. The Hon’ble Supreme Court also observed that t…

Alva Auto Spares Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1275/DEL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No. 1275/Del/2021 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Alva Auto Spares Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax Officer, 1-Vishnu Bhawan, Near Prachin बनाम Shiv Taal Mandir, Chander Vs. Ward : 1 (1) Nagar, Sector : 15, Part-2, Gurgaon – 122 001 [Haryana] Gurgaon. Pan No. Aahca0120B अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Kanav Bali, Sr. D. R
Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…igh Court in the case of CIT Vs. AIMIL Ltd. 321 ITR 508. Ratio of this decision squarely applies to the facts of the assessee’s cases. Reliance was also placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. M/s. Alom Extrusions Limited (2009) 319 ITR 306 (SC). 5. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M.M. Aqua Technologies Ltd. Vs. CIT (supra) held that retrospective provision in a Tax Act which is for the removal of doubts cannot be presumed to be retrospective even where such language is used if it alters or changes the law as it earlier stood. The Hon’ble Supreme Court also observed that t…

Della Adventure and Resorts Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. NFAC, Delhi

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

ITA 1708/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Sept 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2018-19 & Assessment Year: 2019-20 Della Adventure & Resorts Pvt. National Faceless Appeal Ltd., Centre (Nfac), Delhi, 401, Della Tower, 795 Parsi Vs. Colony, Jam-E-Jamshed Road, Mumbai-400014. Pan No. Aadcd 2549 K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Hitesh P. Shah, Ar Revenue By : Mr. T. Shankar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 05/09/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 12/09/2022

For Appellant: Mr. Hitesh P. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Mr. T. Shankar, CIT-DR
Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…Commissioner (Appeals) erred in not following the binding decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. binding decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. binding decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Alom Extrusions Ltd. [(2009) 319 ITR 306 (SC)] and the Alom Extrusions Ltd. [(2009) 319 ITR 306 (SC)] and the Alom Extrusions Ltd. [(2009) 319 ITR 306 (SC)] and the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Ghatge Patil Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Ghatge Patil Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd. (368 ITR 749, Bom.) wherein it was held that Tran…

Della Adventure and Resorts Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. NFAC, Delhi

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

ITA 1707/MUM/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Sept 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2018-19 & Assessment Year: 2019-20 Della Adventure & Resorts Pvt. National Faceless Appeal Ltd., Centre (Nfac), Delhi, 401, Della Tower, 795 Parsi Vs. Colony, Jam-E-Jamshed Road, Mumbai-400014. Pan No. Aadcd 2549 K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Hitesh P. Shah, Ar Revenue By : Mr. T. Shankar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 05/09/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 12/09/2022

For Appellant: Mr. Hitesh P. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Mr. T. Shankar, CIT-DR
Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…Commissioner (Appeals) erred in not following the binding decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. binding decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. binding decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Alom Extrusions Ltd. [(2009) 319 ITR 306 (SC)] and the Alom Extrusions Ltd. [(2009) 319 ITR 306 (SC)] and the Alom Extrusions Ltd. [(2009) 319 ITR 306 (SC)] and the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Ghatge Patil Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Ghatge Patil Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd. (368 ITR 749, Bom.) wherein it was held that Tran…

Ram Singh Rana, Faridabad vs. ADIT, CPC, Faridabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1637/DEL/2021[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Sept 2022AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No. 1637/Del/2021 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Kumar GuptaFor Respondent: [JCIT] - Sr. D. R
Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…igh Court in the case of CIT Vs. AIMIL Ltd. 321 ITR 508. Ratio of this decision squarely applies to the facts of the assessee’s cases. Reliance was also placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. M/s. Alom Extrusions Limited (2009) 319 ITR 306 (SC). 5. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M.M. Aqua Technologies Ltd. Vs. CIT (supra) held that retrospective provision in a Tax Act which is for the removal of doubts cannot be presumed to be retrospective even where such language is used if it alters or changes the law as it earlier stood. The Hon’ble Supreme Court also observed that t…

Worldwide Facilty Management Services Pvt. Ltd., Faridabad vs. ADIT, CPC, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1636/DEL/2021[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Sept 2022AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No. 1636/Del/2021 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: AdvocateFor Respondent: [JCIT] - Sr. D. R
Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…igh Court in the case of CIT Vs. AIMIL Ltd. 321 ITR 508. Ratio of this decision squarely applies to the facts of the assessee’s cases. Reliance was also placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. M/s. Alom Extrusions Limited (2009) 319 ITR 306 (SC). 5. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M.M. Aqua Technologies Ltd. Vs. CIT (supra) held that retrospective provision in a Tax Act which is for the removal of doubts cannot be presumed to be retrospective even where such language is used if it alters or changes the law as it earlier stood. The Hon’ble Supreme Court also observed that t…

ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru, Bengaluru (Karnataka) vs. Shikhar Sadh, Daryaganj Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1460/DEL/2021[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Sept 2022AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No. 1460/Del/2021 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20

For Respondent: Shri M. Baranwal
Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…igh Court in the case of CIT Vs. AIMIL Ltd. 321 ITR 508. Ratio of this decision squarely applies to the facts of the assessee’s cases. Reliance was also placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. M/s. Alom Extrusions Limited (2009) 319 ITR 306 (SC). 2 I.T.A. No. 1460/Del/2021 5. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M.M. Aqua Technologies Ltd. Vs. CIT (supra) held that retrospective provision in a Tax Act which is for the removal of doubts cannot be presumed to be retrospective even where such language is used if it alters or changes the law as it earlier stood. The Hon’ble Suprem…

Wazir Chand Handicraft, Moradabad(U.P) vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Moradabad, Uttarpradesh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1468/DEL/2021[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Sept 2022AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No. 1468/Del/2021 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Wazir Chand Handicrafts, Acit बनाम C/O. Kansal Kapoor & Co., Circle : 1, Vs. 1St Floor, 26-Civil Lines, Moradabad. Near Dayanand Degree College Moradabad [U.P.] – 244 001. Pan No. Aaafw2553L अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Respondent

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Shri M. Baranwal
Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…igh Court in the case of CIT Vs. AIMIL Ltd. 321 ITR 508. Ratio of this decision squarely applies to the facts of the assessee’s cases. Reliance was also placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. M/s. Alom Extrusions Limited (2009) 319 ITR 306 (SC). 2 I.T.A. No. 1468/Del/2021 5. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M.M. Aqua Technologies Ltd. Vs. CIT (supra) held that retrospective provision in a Tax Act which is for the removal of doubts cannot be presumed to be retrospective even where such language is used if it alters or changes the law as it earlier stood. The Hon’ble Suprem…

M/S R S Cargo, Satna vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Processing Centre, Bangalore

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 12/JAB/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur06 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon’Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Rahul Bardia, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Ravi Mehrotra, Sr.DR
Section 1Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43B

…owance u/s. 43B(b) for the years under reference before it, i.e., AY 1992-93, 1994-95 & 1995-96. The issue considered by the 5 | P a g e R.S. Cargo v. Dy. CIT Hon’ble Court is, thus, the same as by the Hon’ble Apex Court in CIT v. Alom Extrusions Ltd. [2009] 319 ITR 306 (SC), though deciding it to the contrary. As regards the aspect of the retrospective nature of the Explanations under reference, we again find no difference in the view expressed therein with that by the Tribunal in Nikhil Mohine (supra), i.e., per se. So, however, as afore-noted, the said Explanations themselves have been proposed as prospective…

Vaibhav Maruti Dombale, Pune vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

ITA 299/PUN/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Sept 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 299/Pun/2021 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2019-2020 Vaibhav Maruti Dombale C9-1, Rajmudra, Dhankawadi, Pune. . . . . . . . अपऩलधथी / Appellant बिधम / V/S. Asstt. Director Of Income Tax Cpc, Bengaluru. . . . . . . . प्रत्यथी / Respondent द्वारा/ Appearances Assessee By : Shri B. B. Mane Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सपिवधई की तधरऩख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 05/09/2022 घोर्णध की तधरऩख / Date Of Pronouncement : 05/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; The Appeal Is Assailed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [For Short “Nfac”] Dt. 22/06/2021 Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Leapt Out Of An Order Of Intimation Passed U/S 143(1) Of The Act, By Asstt. Dit, Cpc-Bengaluru [For Short “Cpc”] Dt. 14/05/2020, For Assessment Year [For Short “Ay”] 2019-2020. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 6

For Appellant: Shri B. B. ManeFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…t acts without reference to section 43B, resultantly the appellant’s claim of deduction made u/s 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 43B for the impugned AY falls anterior, thus protected by the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in case of “CIT Vs Alom Extrusions Ltd.” reported in 319 ITR 306 and by the jurisdictional High Court of Bombay in “CIT Vs Ghatge Patil Transport Ltd.”reported at 368 ITR 749. 9. In the light of above, the impugned NFAC order is set- aside and Ld. AO / CPC is directed to allow the deduction u/s 36(1)(va) as claimed in the return of income. 10. Resultantly, the appeal of the appellant assessee is allowed in af…

Supreme Equipments P Ltd, Nashik vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

ITA 224/PUN/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Sept 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकरअपऩलसं. / Ita No. 224/Pun/2021 निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year : 2019-2020 Supreme Equipments Private Limited B-19, Nice, Midc, Satpur, Nashik. .......अपऩलधथी / Appellant बिधम / V/S. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Cpc, Bengaluru . . . . . . . प्रत्यथी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : None For The Assessee Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सपिवधई की तधरऩख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 05/09/2022 घोर्णध की तधरऩख / Date Of Pronouncement : 05/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; This Appeal Is Assailed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi[For Short “Nfac”] Dt.12/03/2021 Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Dove Out Of An Order Of Intimation Passed U/S 143(1) Of The Act By Asstt. Dit, Cpc-Bengaluru [For Short “Cpc”] Dt. 06/07/2020, For Assessment Year [For Short “Ay”] 2019-2020. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 6

For Appellant: None for the AssesseeFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…t acts without reference to section 43B, resultantly the appellant’s claim of deduction made u/s 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 43B for the impugned AY falls anterior, thus protected by the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in case of “CIT Vs Alom Extrusions Ltd.” reported in 319 ITR 306 and the jurisdictional High Court of Bombay in “CIT Vs Ghatge Patil Transport Ltd.”reported at 368 ITR 749. 9. In the light of aforesaid discussion, the impugned NFAC order is set-aside and Ld. AO / CPC is directed to allow the deduction u/s 36(1)(va) as claimed in the return of income filed. 10. Resultantly, the appeal of the appellant assessee…

Decimal Technologies Private Limited, Fatehabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Fatehabad

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 460/CHANDI/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Aug 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Addressing The Grievance Of The Assessee, It Is Relevant To Address Delay Of 2 Days Pointed Out By The Registry

For Appellant: Shri Sankalp Malik, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Sudershan, Sr.DR

…dery Mills (P) Ltd. (2014) 366 ITR 167(P&H). The jurisdictional High Court relying upon its own decision in the case of CIT Vs Rai Agro Industries 334 ITR 122 and considering the principle laid down by the Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs Alom Extrusions Ltd. 319 ITR 306 (S.C) have addressed the legal position, though it need be clarified that the decision rendered was in the context of amendments carried out by way of Second Proviso to Section 43B which was omitted by Finance Act, 2003. This Amendment was held to be clarificatory and hence would operate retrospectively. In the facts of the present case, Amendmen…

Sathiapal Engineers (India) Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. ACIT CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 610/CHNY/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Aug 2022AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 610/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2017-18 Sathiapal Engineers (India) Pvt. Ltd. The Assistant /Deputy Commissioner Formerly Known As Sathiapal Vs. Of Income Tax, Engineers India Ltd., New No. 14, Cpc, Bengaluru. Old No. 25, Temple Street, Alagappa Nagar, Kilpauk, Chennai 600 010. [Pan:Aahcs2295P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Viswanathan, Ca ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 25.08.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.08.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao,: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), New Delhi, Dated 26.05.2022 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2017-18. The Only Effective Ground Raised In The Appeal Of The Assessee Relates To Confirmation Of Disallowance Of Pf & Esi Payments.

For Appellant: Shri R. Viswanathan, CAFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(v)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…of Madras in the case of M/s. Industrial Security and Intelligence India P Ltd., supra, wherein it is held as under:- “5. We find that the Tribunal has rightly relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT V. Alom Extrusions Ltd. reported in 319 ITR 306, whereby, the Supreme Court held that omission of second proviso to Section 43B and amendment to first proviso by Finance Act, 2003 are curative in nature and are effective retrospectively, i.e., with effect from 1.4.1988 i.e., the date of insertion of first proviso. The Delhi High Court in the case of CIT V. Amil Ltd. reported in 321 ITR 508 hel…

DCIT, Circle- 10(1), New Delhi vs. G4S Facility Services (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 559/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri N.K. Choudhryassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Sh. SalilKapoor, Ld. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Ravi Kant Choudhary, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 26(1)(va)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’ NEW DLEHI BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2015-16 DCIT, Circle 10(1), VersuS G4S Facility Services(India) New Delhi. Ltd., C-16, Community Centre, Behind Janak Cinema, Janakpuri, New Delhi. PAN: AABCG8346B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by :Sh. SalilKapoor, Ld. Adv. Ms.AnanyaKapoor, Ld. Adv. Respondent by : Sh. Ravi Kant Choudhary, Ld. Sr. DR Date of hearing : 30.08.2022 Date of order : 30.08.2022 ORDER PER N.K. CHOUDHRY, J.M. This appeal has been preferred by the Revenue against th…

Shri Indhira Cottons Mills P Ltd, Chennai vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 563/CHNY/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Aug 2022AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./ I. T. A. No.563/Chny/2022 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19) M/S. Shri Indhira Cotton Mills P.Ltd. Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of P.B No.6 , Jagampet Gardens, Income Tax, Cpc, Chitlapakkam Main Road, Chrompet, Bengaluru. Chennai-600 044. Pan: Aaaci 0899J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Respondent: 25.08.2022
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…of Madras in the case of M/s. Industrial Security and Intelligence India P Ltd., supra, wherein it is held as under:- “5. We find that the Tribunal has rightly relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT V. Alom Extrusions Ltd. reported in 319 ITR 306, whereby, the Supreme Court held that omission of second proviso to Section 43B and amendment to first proviso by Finance Act, 2003 are curative in nature and are effective retrospectively, i.e., with effect from 1.4.1988 i.e., the date of insertion of first proviso. The Delhi High Court in the case of CIT V. Amil Ltd. reported in 321 ITR 508 hel…