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.

N J Security Services, Haryana vs. ITO, Ward-3, Rohtak

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1398/DEL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 May 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

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

…s Pro Interactive Services (India) Pvt. Ltd. in ITA no. 983/2018. Learned counsel also relied upon various judgments rendered by Hon’ble Apex Court, which includes Rajasthan State Beverages Ltd (2017) 84 Taxmann.com 185 (SC), CIT Vs. Alom Extrusion Ltd (2010) 1 SCC 489, CIT Vs. Vinay Cement Ltd 213 CTR 268. 4. The learned DR vehemently relied on the orders of the authorities below. NJ Security Services Vs. ITO 5. We have heard rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The CIT(A) while upholding the disallowance/additions qua employee’s contributions towards PF & ESI, mainly focused on two as…

Shri Neeraj Maheshwari, Sonebhadra vs. Dy. CIT, (CPC), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 18/ALLD/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad10 May 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Before Shri. Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Neeraj Maheshwari, V. Shri Amrit Raj Singh, Bijpur Rihand Nagar, Sonebhadra- Dy. Commissioner Of Inco Tax, 2312233, U.P. Cpc Bangalore Pan- Afvpm5660E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Sh. A.K. Pandey, Adv Respondent By: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 09.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 10.05.2022 O R D E R

For Appellant: Sh. A.K. Pandey, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 234BSection 250Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B

…sited by assessee to the credit of employee with relevant fund before the due date prescribed for filing of return of income u/s 139(1) of the 1961 Act , by relying on following judicial decision(s) as stipulated hereunder:- 1. CIT v. Alom Extrusions Ltd., in 319 ITR 306(SC) 2. 2. CIT v. Industrial Security and Intelligence India Pvt. Ltd., (Mad) Tax Case Appeal Nos.585 and 586 of 2015 and M.P No.1 of 2015 , dated 24.07.2015 3. 3. ACIT v. M/s.Easun Products of India (P) Ltd., in I.T.A. No. No.182/Mds./2016, vide order of Chennai Tribunal dated 19.05.2016, for ay: 2012-13. 10.2 Aggrieved by an appellate order date…

Ticomp Heels Private Limited, Lucknow vs. ACIT, Range-1, Lucknow

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 86/LKW/2021[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow10 May 2022AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…habad High Court in the case of Sagun Foundry (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT [2017] 78 taxmann.com 47 (Allahabad) has dealt with similar issue and after taking into account the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Alom Extrusion Ltd. Reported in (2009) 319 ITR 306 and after taking into account views of different High Courts, has decided the similar issue in favour of the assessee by holding as under: “16. Learned counsel for Assessee argued that the issue in question is covered by Supreme Court judgment in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Alom Extrusions Ltd., (2009) 319 ITR 306, but both learned counsels ap…

Vardan Nursing Home Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Income Tax Dept, Mumbai

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

ITA 2344/MUM/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 May 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailvardan Nursing Home Vs. Dcit, Cpc, Bangaluru Private Limited, Cpc Income Tax 65, Jawahar Nagar, Opp Department Prakash Hotel, Goregaon West, Mumbai – 400062 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaccv2156P Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: S.N. Kabra
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…case of GhatgePatil 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 3 ITA No. 2344/Mum/2021 A.Y.2018-19 Vardan Nursing Home Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangaluru Shivananjappa Vijay Kumar vide ITA Nos. 596 & 597/Bang/ 2021 dated 13.12.2021 wherein it is held that explana…

DCIT CC-2(1), Chennai vs. M/S Eversendai Construction Private Limited, Chennai

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

ITA 965/CHNY/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 May 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.965/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Eversendai Construction Private Limited, No. 1 & 2, The Lords, 5Th Floor, Income Tax, Corporate Circle 2(1), Room No. 511, 5Th Floor, Wanaparthy Jawaharlal Nehru Road, Guindy, Block, No. 121, M.G. Road, Chennai 600 032. Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aacce2174N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G. Johnson, Addl. Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri S.P. Chidambaram, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 12.04.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 05.05.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 6, Chennai Dated 09.09.2020 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Delayed By 9 Days In Filing The Appeal Before The Tribunal Due To Outbreak Of Covid-19 Pandemic & Accordingly, The Delay Is Condoned & Admitted The Appeal For Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri G. Johnson, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri S.P. Chidambaram, Advocate
Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 41(1)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’डी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी वी दुगा" राव "ाियक सद" एवं "ी जी. मंजुनाथा, लेखा सद" के सम" Before Shri V. Durga Rao, Judicial Member & Shri G. Manjunatha, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.965/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Deputy Commissioner of Vs. M/s. Eversendai Construction Private Limited, No. 1 & 2, The Lords, 5th Floor, Income Tax, Corporate Circle 2(1), Room No. 511, 5th Floor, Wanaparthy Jawaharlal Nehru Road, Guindy, Block, No. 121, M.G. Road, Chennai 600 032. Chennai 600 034. [PAN:AACCE2174N] (अपीलाथ"/Appella…

Rajkumar Laxminarayan Kanojiya, Mumbai vs. ITO WD-26(3) (6), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed and the orders of the authority below are set aside

ITA 1617/MUM/2021[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai02 May 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: The Itat.

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

…and perused the record. I find that prior to the amendment there were Hon'ble Bombay High Court decision in CIT Vs. Ghatge Patil Transport Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 1002 of 2012 order dated 14.10.2014 following Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in Alom Extrusions Ltd. (319 ITR 306) which laid down that deposits of the sum up to the date of filing of return is sufficient compliance. The Finance Act, 2021 has provided an explanation in this regard for the disallowance of the sum which is paid after the due date. When this fact is taken into account by no stretch of imagination it can said that the above said adjustment can f…

M/S. Meremma Basavaraj Belli, Mumbai vs. ADIT CPC, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed and the orders of the authority below are set aside

ITA 1489/MUM/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: The Itat.

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

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” Bench, Mumbai Shri Shamim Yahya (AM) I.T.A. No. 1489/Mum/2021 (A.Y. 2019-20) Vs. ACIT, CPC M/s. Meremma Basavaraj Belli C-117, Nitya Anand Chawl Bengaluru Mukund Nagar Dharavi Mumbai-400 017. PAN : AQFPB5620G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Devendra Jain Department by Ms. Usha Gaikwad Date of Hearing 28.04.2022 Date of Pronouncement 29.04.2022 O R D E R This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of learned CIT(A) dated 24.6.2921 pertains to A.Y. 2019-20. 2. The solitary issue in dispute is disallowance of EPF and ESI contribution under sectio…

Neo Hy Laminates Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO Ward 18(1), Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 403/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad, S.M.C.

For Respondent: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. D. R
Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…es’ as well as employer’s contribution to EPF and ESI as the same were remitted before the due date of filing of return of income. 5. 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). Grounds raised by the assessee are allowed. 6. In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on : 29/04/2022. ( C. N. PRASAD ) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated : 29/04/2022. *MEHTA*…

Neo Hy Laminates Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO Ward 18(1), Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 402/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad, S.M.C.

For Respondent: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. D. R
Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…es’ as well as employer’s contribution to EPF and ESI as the same were remitted before the due date of filing of return of income. 5. 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). Grounds raised by the assessee are allowed. 6. In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on : 29/04/2022. ( C. N. PRASAD ) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated : 29/04/2022. *MEHTA*…

Raju Kumar Singh, Partner, Delhi vs. Ward 34(2), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 389/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad, S.M.C.

For Appellant: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. D. RFor Respondent: 20/04/2022
Section 143(1)Section 43B

…owance made to employees’ contribution to EPF and ESI as the same were remitted before the due date of filing of return of income. 5. 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). Grounds raised by the assessee are allowed. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. I.T.A. No. 389/Del/2022 Order pronounced in the open court on : 29/04/2022. ( C. N. PRASAD ) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated : 29/04/2022. *MEHTA*…

Promila Hans, Haryana vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Haryana

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 385/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad, S.M.C. आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 385/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Promila Hans, Income Tax Officer, A-74, Gali No. 1, Ward : 2 (1) बनाम Sgm Nagar, Badkhal, Faridabad. Vs. Faridabad – 121 001. Pan No. Aapph6267D अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: N o n e
Section 143(1)Section 43B

…owance made to employees’ contribution to EPF and ESI as the same were remitted before the due date of filing of return of income. 5. 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). Grounds raised by the assessee are allowed. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on : 29/04/2022. ( C. N. PRASAD ) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated : 29/04/2022. *MEHTA* 9 I.T.A. No. 385/Del/2022…

Gurudev Sharma, Delhi vs. DCIT, CPC, Bengalore

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

ITA 1296/DEL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Kul Bharat

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “C” BENCH: NEW DELHI (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING) BEFORE SHRI G.S.PANNU, PRESIDENT & SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.1295 & 1296/Del/2021 [Assessment Years : 2017-18 & 2018-19] Gurudev Sharma, vs DCIT, A-83, Naya Bazar, Najaf Garh, CPC, Delhi-110043. Bengalore. PAN-BJEPS5420E APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Shri Vivek Bansal, Adv. Respondent by Shri Umesh Takyar, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 01.04.2022 Date of Pronouncement 29.04.2022 ORDER PER KUL BHARAT, JM : Both appeals filed by the assessee for the assessment years 2017-18 & 2018-19 are directed against the ord…

Gurudev Sharma, Delhi vs. DCIT, CPC, Bengalore

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

ITA 1295/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Kul Bharat

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “C” BENCH: NEW DELHI (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING) BEFORE SHRI G.S.PANNU, PRESIDENT & SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.1295 & 1296/Del/2021 [Assessment Years : 2017-18 & 2018-19] Gurudev Sharma, vs DCIT, A-83, Naya Bazar, Najaf Garh, CPC, Delhi-110043. Bengalore. PAN-BJEPS5420E APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Shri Vivek Bansal, Adv. Respondent by Shri Umesh Takyar, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 01.04.2022 Date of Pronouncement 29.04.2022 ORDER PER KUL BHARAT, JM : Both appeals filed by the assessee for the assessment years 2017-18 & 2018-19 are directed against the ord…

Emkay Facilities Services Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. Astt. Director of Income Tax (CPC), Bangalore [DCIT Circle 6(1)(1), Mumbai]

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 1838/MUM/2021[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2022AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Amarjit Singhemkay Facilities Vs. Acit (Cpc), Services Pvt Ltd Bangalore B-11, Ground Floor, [Dcit Circle – 6(1)(1) Veena Beena, Mumbai]-400020 Prabodhnkar Thakare Road, Sewree (W) – Mumbai-400015 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aacce0492R Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : None Respondent By : Mr.B.K.Bagchi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 28.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 30.03.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm:

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr.B.K.Bagchi, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 154Section 36(1)(va)

…und u/s 36(1)(va) r.w.s 43B and 2(24)(x) of the Act. a) By disregarding the judgement of Jurisdictional High Court of Bombay in the case of Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd. 368 ITR 749 and Hind Filter Ltd 90 taxmann.com 51 (Bombay) and Alom Extrusions Ltd. [2009] 319 ITR 306 (SC). By disregarding the fact that the judgement of Jurisdictional High Court is binding even in faceless appeal and assessment as per the order of Mahadev Cold Storage 127 taxmann.com 722 (Agra) I which it is held that, "Though Centralized NFAC has been created by Notification by CBDT, it should be ensured that c) By disregarding the fact that…

One Point One Solutions Limited, Vashi, Navi Mumbai, Thane vs. CIT (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi

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

ITA 1443/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ajay R. Singh
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…idered the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation [2014] 366 ITR 170 (Guj). The assessee has also relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Alom Extrusions Case [2009] 319 ITR 306 (SC), which was contended by the ld. CIT(A) as applicable only for disallowance u/s.43B of the Act and not for section 36(1)(va) of the Act brought about in the Finance Bill 2021, where explanation to Sec 36(1)(va) has stated that employee’s contribution to PF/ESIC will be disallowed if the same is not deposited before the specified due date. 8.…

M/S Mahavir Paints and Adhesives Pvt.Ltd, Kanpur vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(3)(3), Kanpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 20/LKW/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow27 Apr 2022AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jainassessment Year: 2019-20 M/S Mahavir Paints & V. The Income Tax Officer Adhesives Pvt. Ltd. Ward 2(3)(3) 123/760-D, Fazal Ganj Kanpur Kanpur Tan/Pan:Aaacm9521B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Rakesh Garg, Advocate Respondent By: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 09 03 2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 27 04 2022 O R D E R This Is Assessee’S Appeal Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac, New Delhi, Dated 20.12.2021, For Assessment Year 2019-20, Raising The Following Grounds Of Appeal: 1. Because The Cit(A)/Nfac Has .Erred On Facts & In Law In Upholding The Disallowance Of Rs.1,63,230/- Being Amount Paid Towards Esic & Epf Of The Employees, Which Amount Being Allowable Both On The Basis Of Interpretation Of The Statute & On The Basis Of The Decision Of The Apex Court In The, Case Of Allom Extrusion 319 Ir 306 (Sc). Pr. Cit Vs. Rajasthan State Beverages Corporation Ltd. & The Allahabad High Court In The Case Of Shagun Foundry Private Limited Vs. Cit ,Ita No. .87 Of 20061 'The Same Be Allowed. 2. Because The Cit(A)/Nfac Has Failed To Appreciate That The Amount Of Rs.1,63,230/- Being Esic & Epf, Being A Business Expenditure Incurred For The Purpose Of Business Having Been 'Paid Before The Filing Of The Return Of Income, The Same Being An Allowable Business

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R
Section 36(1)(va)Section 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 addition sustained by learned CIT(A) be deleted. Page 3 of 17 5. 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 this regard, our attention was invited to the findings of…

M/S Premier Car Sales Ltd, Hazratganj vs. The ACIT -5, Lucknow New

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

ITA 2/LKW/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow27 Apr 2022AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R
Section 36(1)(v)Section 36(1)(va)Section 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. 5. The ld. D. R., on the other hand, placing reliance on the orders 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 this regard, our attention was invited to the findings of the learned C…

M/S Premier Car Sales Ltd, Hazratgang vs. The ACIT -5, Lucknow New

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

ITA 1/LKW/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow27 Apr 2022AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R
Section 36(1)(v)Section 36(1)(va)Section 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. 5. The ld. D. R., on the other hand, placing reliance on the orders 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 this regard, our attention was invited to the findings of the learned C…

Mr. Shitij Dhawan, Kanpur vs. The Assessing Officer, Special Range

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 137/LKW/2021[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow27 Apr 2022AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year: 2018-19 Mr. Shitij Dhawan V. The Assessing Officer 122/235, Fazalganj Special Range Kanpur Kanpur Tan/Pan:Acqpd3380G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Rakesh Garg, Advocate Respondent By: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 09 03 2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 27 04 2022 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R
Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 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 addition sustained by learned CIT(A) be deleted. 4. 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 this regard, our attention was invited to the findings of the learned CIT…

Forcepoint Software Consulting India Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ADIT, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 6/MUM/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailforcepoint Software Vs. Assistant Director Of Consulting India Pvt. Income Tax, Cpc Ltd., Level 2, Kalpataru Bangalore Synergy Opp. Grand Karnataka 560500 Hyatt, Santacruz (East) Mumbai- 400055 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaacw6672P Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Renu KapoorFor Respondent: S.N. Kabra
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…case of GhatgePatil 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…