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.

Ravi Sopan Agarkar, Pune vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward 8(1), Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 652/PUN/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Aug 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.652/Pun/2021 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20 Ravi Sopan Agarkar, The Income Tax Officer, Near Zp School, Agarwadi, Vs Ward-8(1), Pune. Chakan, Tal. Khed, Pune-410501. Pan: Ajtpa 7236 Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri M.K.Kulkarani – Ar Revenue By Shri M.G.Jasnani – Dr Date Of Hearing 19/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 04/08/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, For The Assessment Year 2019-20 Dated 26.10.2021. The Assessee Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1) On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Ld. Nfac-Delhi Was Not Justified In Disallowing Contribution Made To Epf Under S. 36(1)(Va) Holding That The Amended Law Applied W.E.F. 01-4-2021 Being Clarificatory & Retrospective Amendment. In View Of This The New Law Was Applicable & As The Contribution Received From Employee Was Not Credited Before Due Date Of The Parent Act. There Is No Retrospective Effect To The Amendment. It Be Held Accordingly. 2) On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law Nfac Has Wrongly Held That The Amended Law Applied W.E.F. 1-4- 2021 Was Clarificatory Nature & Applied All Pending Assessments Also. The Inserted Explanation 2 To Clause (Va) Of Sub-Section (1) To Clarify That Provisions Of Section 43B Shall Not Apply & Shall Be

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 250Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…1-22 and subsequent years. It cannot be 'clarificatory' as held by NFAC. The addition be deleted. 3) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. NFAC distinguished the verdict of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT v. Alom Extrusion Ltd. 319 ITR 306 saying it was not applicable because court had decided the issue qua employers contribution per S. 43B(b) and not qua employees contribution u/s 36(l)(va) of the Act. Since newly amended law applies from 01-4- 2021 and from A. Y. 2021-22 the NFAC totally erred in distinguishing the Supreme Court judgment (supra). It be held accordingly. 4) On the…

Bellur Hiriyaniah Sridhar Murthy, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 544/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Aug 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: None
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 250Section 30Section 32Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 41Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 543 & 544/Bang/2022 Assessment Years : 2018-19 & 2019-20 Shri Bellur Hiriyaniah Sridhar Murthy, The Income Tax No. 65, East Anjaneya Officer, Temple Street, Ward 5 (2)(1), Basavanagudi, Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 004. Vs. PAN: AIZPS3972L APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : None : Shri Sankar Ganesh K, JCIT Revenue by DR ITAT Date of Hearing : 03-08-2022 Date of Pronouncement : 03-08-2022 ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present appeals by the assessee has…

Bellur Hiriyaniah Sridhar Murthy, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 543/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Aug 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: None
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 250Section 30Section 32Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 41Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 543 & 544/Bang/2022 Assessment Years : 2018-19 & 2019-20 Shri Bellur Hiriyaniah Sridhar Murthy, The Income Tax No. 65, East Anjaneya Officer, Temple Street, Ward 5 (2)(1), Basavanagudi, Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 004. Vs. PAN: AIZPS3972L APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : None : Shri Sankar Ganesh K, JCIT Revenue by DR ITAT Date of Hearing : 03-08-2022 Date of Pronouncement : 03-08-2022 ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present appeals by the assessee has…

Wave Mechancis Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 529/BANG/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Aug 2022AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanassessment Year : 2020-21 M/S. Wave Mechanics Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, V-3, V-3, I Main, I Phase, Peenya Cpc, Industrial Area, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 058. Pan : Aaacw 3621 J Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Madhukeshwar Hegde, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel For Department. Date Of Hearing : 26.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 01.08.2022 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. Madhukeshwar Hegde, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel for Department
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 2Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC - A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N. V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT Assessment Year : 2020-21 M/s. Wave Mechanics Pvt. Ltd., Vs. DCIT, V-3, V-3, I Main, I Phase, Peenya CPC, Industrial Area, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 058. PAN : AAACW 3621 J APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. Madhukeshwar Hegde, CA Revenue by : Shri. Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel for Department. Date of hearing : 26.07.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 01.08.2022 O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against order dated 08.09.2021 of CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, r…

Krishnappa Murthy, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 518/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Aug 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanassessment Year : 2018-19 Shri. Krishnappa Murthy, Vs. Cit, #67, 4Th Cross, 2Nd Main, Hosahalli, Cpc, Vijayanagar, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 040. Pan : Armpm 8844 P Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Ms. Priya Balashankar, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel For Department. Date Of Hearing : 26.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 01.08.2022 O R D E R

For Appellant: Ms. Priya Balashankar, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel for Department
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 2Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC - B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N. V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT Assessment Year : 2018-19 Shri. Krishnappa Murthy, Vs. CIT, #67, 4th Cross, 2nd Main, Hosahalli, CPC, Vijayanagar, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 040. PAN : ARMPM 8844 p APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Ms. Priya Balashankar, CA Revenue by : Shri. Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel for Department. Date of hearing : 26.07.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 01.08.2022 O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against order dated 08.04.2022 of CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, relating to…

Balmatta Diagnostic & Research Centre Ltd., Mangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the both the appeals are allowed

ITA 516/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Aug 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan

For Appellant: Smt. Mrinalini R, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel for Department
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 2Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC - C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N. V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT ITA Nos.515 & 516/Bang/2022 Assessment Years : 2018-19 and 2019-20 M/s. Balmatta Diagnostic and Vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax Research Centre Ltd., (Appeals), D. No. 15-6-295/7-10, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Balmatta Complex, Delhi. Bridge Road, BALMATTA, MANGALORE – 575 001. PAN : AAACB 8460 E APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Smt. Mrinalini R, Advocate Revenue by : Shri. Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel for Department. Date of hearing : 25.07.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 01.08.2022 O R D E R…

Balmatta Diagnostic & Research Centre Ltd., Mangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the both the appeals are allowed

ITA 515/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Aug 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan

For Appellant: Shri. G. Sathyanarayan, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel for Department
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 2Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC - C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N. V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT ITA Nos.515 & 516/Bang/2022 Assessment Years : 2018-19 and 2019-20 M/s. Balmatta Diagnostic and Vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax Research Centre Ltd., (Appeals), D. No. 15-6-295/7-10, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Balmatta Complex, Delhi. Bridge Road, BALMATTA, MANGALORE – 575 001. PAN : AAACB 8460 E APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. G. Sathyanarayan, CA Revenue by : Shri. Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel for Department. Date of hearing : 25.07.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 01.08.2022 O R D E R…

M/S. Sree Narasimha Hotels Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Director Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 309/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Aug 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanassessment Year : 2019-20 M/S. Sree Narasimha Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Director Of Income Tax, No.57, Ground Floor, Vasuki, Cpc, Swasthi Road Cross Shanthi Nagar, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 027. Pan : Aakcs 0472 K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Ms. Priya Balashankar, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel For Department. Date Of Hearing : 26.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 01.08.2022 O R D E R

For Appellant: Ms. Priya Balashankar, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel for Department
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 2Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC - C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N. V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT Assessment Year : 2019-20 M/s. Sree Narasimha Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Director of Income Tax, No.57, Ground Floor, Vasuki, CPC, Swasthi Road Cross Shanthi Nagar, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 027. PAN : AAKCS 0472 K APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Ms. Priya Balashankar, CA Revenue by : Shri. Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel for Department. Date of hearing : 26.07.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 01.08.2022 O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against order dated 01.12.2021 of CIT(A),…

Sharavathi Pathina Sahakari Sangha Niyamitha, Shivamogga vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals of the Assessee for AY 2013-14 &

ITA 152/BANG/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan

For Appellant: Shri. G. Sathyanarayan, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel for Department
Section 2Section 22Section 80PSection 80P(1)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(4)

…bay High Court in the case of ‘Commissioner of Income Tax v. Gem Plus Jewellery India Ltd.,’ [2011] 330 ITR 175 [Bom], wherein it is held thus: “13. By reason of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Alom Extrusions Limited [2009] 319 ITR 306 the employer's contribution was liable to be allowed, since it was deposited by the due date for the filing of the return. The peculiar position, however, as it obtains in the present case arises out of the fact that the disallowance which was effected by the Assessing Officer has not, the Court is informed, been challenged by the assessee. As a…

Sharavathi Pathina Sahakara Sangha Niyamitha, Shivamogga vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals of the Assessee for AY 2013-14 &

ITA 151/BANG/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan

For Appellant: Shri. G. Sathyanarayan, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel for Department
Section 2Section 22Section 80PSection 80P(1)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(4)

…bay High Court in the case of ‘Commissioner of Income Tax v. Gem Plus Jewellery India Ltd.,’ [2011] 330 ITR 175 [Bom], wherein it is held thus: “13. By reason of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Alom Extrusions Limited [2009] 319 ITR 306 the employer's contribution was liable to be allowed, since it was deposited by the due date for the filing of the return. The peculiar position, however, as it obtains in the present case arises out of the fact that the disallowance which was effected by the Assessing Officer has not, the Court is informed, been challenged by the assessee. As a…

Sharavathi Pathina Sahakara Sangha Niyamitha, Shivamogga vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals of the Assessee for AY 2013-14 &

ITA 150/BANG/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan

For Appellant: Shri. G. Sathyanarayan, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel for Department
Section 2Section 22Section 80PSection 80P(1)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(4)

…bay High Court in the case of ‘Commissioner of Income Tax v. Gem Plus Jewellery India Ltd.,’ [2011] 330 ITR 175 [Bom], wherein it is held thus: “13. By reason of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Alom Extrusions Limited [2009] 319 ITR 306 the employer's contribution was liable to be allowed, since it was deposited by the due date for the filing of the return. The peculiar position, however, as it obtains in the present case arises out of the fact that the disallowance which was effected by the Assessing Officer has not, the Court is informed, been challenged by the assessee. As a…

C Krishniah Chetty Jewellers Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 747/BANG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Aug 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanassessment Year : 2018-19 M/S. Krishniah Chetty Jewellers Vs. Dcit, Pvt. Ltd., Circle – 1(1)(1), No.36, 1St Floor, Commercial Street, Bengaluru. Shivaji Nagar, Bengaluru – 560 001. Pan : Aaack 5621 J Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. C. R. Krishna, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel For Department. Date Of Hearing : 25.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 01.08.2022 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. C. R. Krishna, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel for Department
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 2Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC - A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N. V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT Assessment Year : 2018-19 M/s. Krishniah Chetty Jewellers Vs. DCIT, Pvt. Ltd., Circle – 1(1)(1), No.36, 1st Floor, Commercial Street, Bengaluru. Shivaji Nagar, Bengaluru – 560 001. PAN : AAACK 5621 J APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. C. R. Krishna, CA Revenue by : Shri. Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel for Department. Date of hearing : 25.07.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 01.08.2022 O R D E R This is an appeal by the assessee against the order of CIT(A)-11, Bengaluru, dated 09.11.2021, relating to As…

Bholanath Precision Engineering Pvt Ltd, Bhandup, Mumbai vs. CIT(Appeals), CIT(A) National Faceless Appeal Centre

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

ITA 86/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharshi () & Kavitha Rajagopal () Bholanath Precision Engineering Vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax Pvt Ltd, 11, Kembros Industrial (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Estate, Sonapur Lane, Bhandup, Centre, Delhi Mumbai-400 078 Pan : Aaccb6076G Appellant Respondent

Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…for filing the return of income and relied upon various judgements including jurisdictional Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT vs Ghatge Patil Transport Ltd (2014) 368 ITR 749 (Bom) and the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in CIT vs Alom Extrusions Ltd (2009) 319 ITR 306 (SC). 5. The Ld.DR, on the other hand, alleged that the said amount should have been deposited before the due date specified under the relevant Acts and that section 43B was applicable to employer’s contribution and not to employees’ contribution. For this proposition, the Ld.DR relied on the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of…

Samosaran Yarns Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the present appeal is allowed

ITA 2111/MUM/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jul 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: The Due Date Of Filing Income Tax Return Prescribed Under Section 139(1) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri M.B. SanghviFor Respondent: Shri Hoshang B. Irani
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…Court in the case of CIT vs. Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd. (2015) 53 taxmann.com 141 (Bombay), CIT vs. Hindustan Organics Chemicals Ltd. [2014] 366 ITR 1 (Bombay) and the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Alom Extrusions Ltd. [2009] 319 ITR 306 (SC). Further, the Tribunal has in number of decisions held that the amendments introduced by the Finance Act, 2021 are applicable for Assessment Year 2021-22, 2 ITA. No. 2111/Mum/2021 Assessment Year: 2018-19 and therefore, the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the disallowance by placing reliance on the same. 7. The Ld. Departmental Representati…

M/S Neo Tech Engineering, Raipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru, Raipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 88/RPR/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur26 Jul 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: S/Shri Y.K Mishra, AR- for Sl. No.1, 2, 7 & 8For Respondent: S/Shri G.N Singh, DR & P.K Mishra, DR
Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

…ibunal, in law, was right in allowing the claim of the Assessee on account of delayed payments of P.F. Of employees' contribution amounting to Rs.1,82,77,138/- by relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Alom Extrusion Ltd. (319 ITR 306) ?” After referring to the amendments that were made available to Section 43B of the Act, the Hon’ble High Court answered the aforesaid question in 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 Hig…

Jt, CIT (OSD) 11(2)(2), Mumbai vs. State Street Syntel Services Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the learned assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 3815/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm Jt Cit (Osd) State Street Syntel Services 11(2)(2) Pvt. Ltd. 421, 4Th Floor, B–101 To 104, Delphi Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Hiranandani Business Park, Churchgate, Powai, Mumbai-400 076 Mumbai-400 020 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Aaics 0964 Q Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Jasbir Chouhan, Dr Date Of Hearing: 11.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.07.2022

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Jasbir Chouhan, DR
Section 10Section 139Section 36Section 43B

…State Street Syntel Services Pvt. Ltd; A.Y. 13–14 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM JT CIT (OSD) State Street Syntel Services 11(2)(2) Pvt. Ltd. 421, 4TH Floor, B–101 to 104, Delphi Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Hiranandani Business Park, Churchgate, Powai, Mumbai-400 076 Mumbai-400 020 (Respondent) (Appellant) PAN No. AAICS 0964 Q Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Jasbir Chouhan, DR Date of hearing: 11.07.2022 Date of pronouncement : 26.07.2022 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM: 01. This appeal is filed by The Joint Commission…

J.P. Motor Rpivate Limited, Lucknow vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-1, Lucknow

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 118/LKW/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow25 Jul 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year: 2018-19 J.P. Motor Pvt. Ltd. V. The Acit 313/22, Khun Khun Ji Road Range 1 Chowk, Lucknow Lucknow Tan/Pan:Aabcj6763H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Devashish Mehrotra, Advocate Respondent By: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 21 07 2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 25 07 2022 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Devashish Mehrotra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R
Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B

…High Court, in the case of ‘Sagun Foundry (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT’, [2017] 78 taxmann.com 47 (Allahabad), wherein, the Hon'ble High Court has relied upon and referred to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ‘CIT vs. Alom Extrusions Ltd.’, [2009] 319 ITR 306. It was submitted that therefore, the additions sustained by learned CIT(A) be deleted. 7. The ld. D. R., on the other hand, placing reliance on the order of the ld. CIT(A), has submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has relied on a number of case laws for sustaining the addition. In Page 4 of 17 this regard, our attention was invited to the findings of…

Optech Engineering Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ADIT, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 2128/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopalassessment Years: 2017-18 M/S. Optech Engineering Pvt. Asst. Director Of Income Tax, Ltd., Cpc, D 151, Amar Gian, Post Bag No.2, Vs. Opp New St Stand, Electronic City Post Office, Khopat, Bangalore – 560 500 Thane- 400 601 Pan: Aaaco7459C (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Dinesh Singh, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 20 . 07 . 2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 25 . 07 . 2022 O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The A.O. U/S 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, For A.Y. 2017-18. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us:

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Dinesh Singh, D.R
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ase of Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd. (supra), the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court held that both employers and employee’s contributions are covered under amendment to section 43B and judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT v. Alom Extrusions Ltd. [2009] 319 ITR 306/185 Taxman 416 that payment made was subject to benefit of section 43B. We have perused the decision of ITAT Bangalore in the case of Mavinahalli Shivananjappa Vijay Kumar vide ITA Nos. 596 & 597/Bang/ 2021 dated 13.12.2021 wherein it is held that explanatory memorandum to the Finance Act 2021 proposing amendment in Section 36(1)(va) as well as s…

Mafatlal Industries Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT-6(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 4369/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Arati Vissanji &For Respondent: Nimesh Yadav
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.NO. 6963/MUM/2012 (A.Y. 2007-08) M/s. Mafatlal Industries Limited v. Addl. CIT – 6(3) Mafatlal House, Backbay Reclamation Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road H.T. Parekh Marg, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400020 PAN: AAACM2813L (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA.NO. 4369/MUM/2013 (A.Y. 2008-09) M/s. Mafatlal Industries Limited v. Addl. CIT – 6(3) Kaledonia, Office No.3 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road 6th Floor, Sahar Road Mumbai - 400020 Andheri (E), Mumbai - 400069 PAN: AAACM2…

Mafatlal Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 6(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 6963/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Arati Vissanji &For Respondent: Nimesh Yadav
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.NO. 6963/MUM/2012 (A.Y. 2007-08) M/s. Mafatlal Industries Limited v. Addl. CIT – 6(3) Mafatlal House, Backbay Reclamation Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road H.T. Parekh Marg, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400020 PAN: AAACM2813L (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA.NO. 4369/MUM/2013 (A.Y. 2008-09) M/s. Mafatlal Industries Limited v. Addl. CIT – 6(3) Kaledonia, Office No.3 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road 6th Floor, Sahar Road Mumbai - 400020 Andheri (E), Mumbai - 400069 PAN: AAACM2…