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.

Anand Jesudass, Coimbatore vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 2(5), Coimbatore

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

ITA 82/CHNY/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Mar 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Ble

For Respondent: Mr.M.Rajan, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 36(1)(va)

…Limited while deciding on effective date. :: 8 :: 3.1 The Honourable ITAT attention is invited to the very decision of the Honourable Supreme court in civil appeal No.7771 of 2009 in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Versus M/s. Alom Extrusions Limited (319 ITR 306) wherein on a similar issue on interpretation of effective date, Honourable Supreme court held as under: "It is true that the Parliament has explicitly stated that Finance Act, 2003, will operate -with effect from 1st April, 2004. However, the matter before us involves the principle of construction to be placed on the provisions of Finance Act,…

M/S Ind Synergy Limited, Raipur (Cg) vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax 1(2), Raipur (Cg)

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

ITA 312/BIL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur30 Mar 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 312/Rpr/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Ind Synergy Limited Gokul Puram, Kachna Road, Khamardih, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aaaci7072D .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-1(2), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Abhishek Mahawar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Shravankumar Meena, Dr

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Mahawar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Shravankumar Meena, DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(24)(x)Section 3Section 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 Hi…

M/S. Prestige Fabricators Pvt. Ltd., Indore vs. The ACIT 4(1), Indore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 184/IND/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Mar 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Goyal &For Respondent: Shri R.P. Maurya, Sr. D.R
Section 139Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…thetics Limited in Appeal No.333 of 2004 (Guj. HC) * Kamal Textiles vs. ITO (1991) 59 Taxmann 555 (M.P. HC) As regards the employer’s contribution, the Ld. AR submitted that the same is an allowable claim as held in case of CIT v. Alom Extrusions Ltd. [2009] 319 ITR 306/185 Taxman 416 & CIT v. Vinay Cement Ltd. [2007] 213 CTR 268 (SC) by the Hon’ble Apex Court. 6. As regards to Ground No. 2, the Ld. AR submitted that the CIT(A) was not justified in adding Rs. 4,95,540/- paid towards the rate difference in LPG Cylinder being debited in past years expenses but determined and ascertained during the F.Y. 2016-17. A…

Shri Vijendra Kumar Tiwari, Indore vs. The CIT NFAC, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 175/IND/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ram Maurya, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ITA No.175/Ind/2021 A.Y. 2018-19 Page 1 of 6 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BHAGIRATH MAL BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Conducted through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Vijendra Kumar Tiwari, vs. CIT(A), NFAC 437, Talawali Chanda, Delhi. A.B. Road, Near Bhopal Motors, Dewas Naka Panchwati Colony, Indore – 452 010. [PAN – AEOPT 1213 N] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : None Respondent by : Shri Ram Maurya, D.R. Date of hearing : 24.02.2022 Date of pronouncement : 30.03.2022 O R D E R PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDIC…

Dakshin Gujarat Vij Company Ltd., Surat vs. The Pr. CIT-1, Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1527/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Mar 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalassessment Years : 2015-16 Dakshin Gujarat Vij Co. Ltd., Pri. Commissioner Of Urja Sadan, Nana Varachha Road, Vs Income-Tax-1, Kapodara Char Rasta, Surat, Ahmedabad Guajrat-395006 Pan : Aabcd 8912 C अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri M.K. Patel, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Vijaykumar Jaiswal, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 16/03/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/03/2022 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vijaykumar Jaiswal, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)Section 32(1)Section 32(1)(iia)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘बी’ अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD (through web-based video conferencing platform) BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Years : 2015-16 Dakshin Gujarat Vij Co. Ltd., Pri. Commissioner of Urja Sadan, Nana Varachha Road, Vs Income-tax-1, Kapodara Char Rasta, Surat, Ahmedabad Guajrat-395006 PAN : AABCD 8912 C अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Responde…

Valiant Resource and Tech Solutions Private Limtied, Delhi vs. Circle-26(2), Delhi

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

ITA 98/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Kumar Garg, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 2(24)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ate deposit of employee contribution towards ESI/PF , even it is paid before due date of filing of ITR in view of Section 43B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and ignored various judicial pronouncement cited by the assessee like CIT v. Alom Extrusions Ltd. [2009] 319 ITR 306 (SC); CIT v. Vinay Cement Ltd. [2007] 213 CTR 268 (SC); Pr. CIT v. Raj. State Bev. Corpn. Ltd. [2017] 84 taxmann.com 185 (SC); CIT v. AIMIL Limited [2010] 321 ITR 508 (Delhi) In a latest order dated 10.09.2018 the Jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in ITA 983/2018 Pro Interactive Service (India) Pvt. Ltd has held this issue in the favour of asses…

Sequoia Safety Products, Delhi vs. Ward 24(2), Delhi

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

ITA 96/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Mar 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Kumar Garg, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 2(24)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…late deposit of employee contribution towards ESI/PF , even it is paid before due date of filing of ITR in view of Section 43B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and ignored various judicial pronouncement cited by the assessee like CIT v. Alom Extrusions Ltd. [2009] 319 ITR 306 (SC); CIT v. Vinay Cement Ltd. [2007] 213 CTR 268 (SC); Pr. CIT v. Raj. State Bev. Corpn. Ltd. [2017] 84 taxmann.com 185 (SC); CIT v. AIMIL Limited [2010] 321 ITR 508 (Delhi) In a latest order dated 10.09.2018 the Jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in ITA 983/2018 Pro Interactive Service (India) Pvt. Ltd has held this issue in the favour of asse…

Amit Singh, Bhiwadi (Alwar) vs. DCIT, CPC- Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessees is allowed

ITA 284/JPR/2021[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Mar 2022AY 2018-2019
For Appellant: Shri Rahish Mohammed (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT) a
Section 143(1)Section 2(24)Section 36(1)(va)

…14, 2014 10. Delhi High Court [2010] 321 ITR 508 (Delhi) December 23,2009 Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Aimil Limited, Nirmala Swami Spearhead Digital Studio, M/s Net 4 India Ltd. Modipon Ltd. & M/s Ekta Agro Industries Ltd. 11. Hon’ble Supreme Court [2009] 319 ITR 306 (SC) November 25, 2009 Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/s Alom Extrusions Limited 12. Hon’ble Supreme Court [1997] 224 ITR 677 (SC) March 10, 1997 Allied Motors Private Limited vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax 13. SC order [2009] 313 ITR 1 March 7, 2007 CIT vs. Vinay Cement Ltd. 14 SC order: July 4, 2017 Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur…

Amba Tech Engineering, Jaipur vs. ITO, Bhiwadi

In the result, the appeal of the assessees is allowed

ITA 243/JPR/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Mar 2022AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Rahish Mohammed (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT) a
Section 143(1)Section 2(24)Section 234BSection 36(1)(va)

…S LTD. 6. DELHI HIGH COURT: [2010] 321 ITR 508 (Delhi): December 23, 2009 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VERSUS AIMIL LIMITED, NIRMALA SWAMI, SPEARHEAD DIGITAL STUDIO, M/S. NET 4 INDIA LTD., MODIPON LTD., & M/S. EKTA AGRO INDUSTRIES LTD., 7. SUPREME COURT: [2009] 319 ITR 306 (SC): November 25, 2009 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VERSUS M/S. ALOM EXTRUSIONS LIMITED 8. SUPREME COURT [1997] 224 ITR 677 (SC). - March 10, 1997 ALLIED MOTORS PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX 9. SC ORDER: [2009] 313 ITR (St.) 1: March 7, 2007 CIT VERSUS VINAY CEMENT LTD. 10. SC ORDER: July 4, 2017 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOM…

Medopharmprivate Ltd, Chennai vs. ACIT, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 54/CHNY/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.54/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Medopharm Private Ltd., The Assistant Commissioner Of 25, Puliyur 2Nd Main Road, Trustpuram, Vs. Income Tax, Cpc, Kodambakkam, Chennai 600 024. Bengaluru 560 500. [Pan:Aadcm9459R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri M. Karunakaran, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 21.03.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.03.2022 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 15.12.2021 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2018-19 On 22.10.2018 Admitting Nil Income. The Cpc, Bengaluru Has Completed The Assessment Under 2

For Appellant: Shri M. Karunakaran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 44A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’सी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ 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.54/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/s. Medopharm Private Ltd., The Assistant Commissioner of 25, Puliyur 2nd Main Road, Trustpuram, Vs. Income Tax, CPC, Kodambakkam, Chennai 600 024. Bengaluru 560 500. [PAN:AADCM9459R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri M. Karunakaran, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respon…

New Consolidated Construction Co. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Dditcpc, Bangalore

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

ITA 1632/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Mar 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Us:

For Appellant: Hiro RaiFor Respondent: C.T. Mathews
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)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 and payment made was subject to benefit of section 43B. We have also gone through the decision of ITAT MavinahalliShivanajappa Vijay Kumar Vs. DCIT (ITA No. 596 & 597/Bang/2021) and AdhyarAnandBhavan Sweets India P. Ltd. Vs. ACIT (ITA No.402 & 403/Chennai/2021) on the issue of ITA No.1632/Mum/2021 A.Y. 2017-18 3 New Consolidated Co…

Chandrahas Mundappa Rai, Mumbai vs. DCIT, CPC, CPC Bangalore

ITA 1595/MUM/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Om Prakash Kantassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Haridas Bhatt, A.RFor Respondent: Shri R.A. Dhyani, D.R
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “C”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2018-19 Mr. Chandrahas Mundappa DCIT, CPC, Rai, CBC Bangalore, 3/1323 R, Navjivan Bangalore, Vs. Commercial Society, Karnataka – 560 100 Lamington Road, Mumbai – 400 008 PAN: AADPR9485P (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Haridas Bhatt, A.R. Revenue by : Shri R.A. Dhyani, D.R. Date of Hearing : 29 . 03 . 2022 Date of Pronouncement : 29 . 03 . 2022 O R D E R Per : Kuldip Singh, Judicial Member: The appellant, Mr. Chandrahas Mu…

M/S Sushma Buildtech Limited, Chandigarh vs. DCIT, CPC/DCIT, Circle-2(1), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 323/CHANDI/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: The Due Date Of Filing Of Income Tax Return.

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…y 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, Amend…

M/Squixotic Healthcare, Chandigarh vs. DCIT, CPC/ACIT, Circle-1(1), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 322/CHANDI/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: The Due Date Of Filing Of Income Tax Return.

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…y 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, Amend…

Manmeet Alloys Private Limited, Ludhiana vs. DCIT, CPC//DCIT-Circle-V(1), Ludhiana

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 318/CHANDI/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Mar 2022AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Ms. Vidisha Vinay, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr.DR
Section 250(6)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…y 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, Amend…

Sh. Sanjeev Shyam, Shimla vs. DCIT, CPC/ITO-Ward-2, Shimla

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 316/CHANDI/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt.Diva Singh & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavsanjeev Shyam, Deputy Commissioner Of बनाम M/S Veagle Securities Service, Income Tax, Cpc, Bengaluru, Karnataka. Kaushal Niwas, Kauftadhar, Bharari, Shimla. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Bxwps6383L

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Mohan, AdvFor Respondent: Dr.Ranjeet Kaur, Sr.DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…can be made. In support, reliance was placed on decision of the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Hemla Embroidery Mills (P) Ltd., 366 ITR 117 and the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Alom Extrusion Ltd., 319 ITR 306. It was further submitted that the aforesaid decisions have since been followed by the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Mark Auto Industries Ltd., 358 ITR 43, CIT Vs. Kamal Family Trust (2013), 219 Taxman 81 and 3 A.Y.2018-19 CIT Vs. Nuchem Limited, 59 Taxmann.com 455. It was submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) has relied…

Sharda Oil Industries Pvt. Ltd., Agra vs. Jurisdictional Officer, Circle-2(1)(1), Agra

In the result all the appeals filed by the

ITA 62/AGR/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: : Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2018-19 Sharda Oil Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Jo Circle-2(1)(1), 17, Tundla Road, Nunhai Agrau.P. Agrau.P. Pan: Aaecs1396L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2019-20 Prem Motors Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Jo Dcit/Acit, Circle-1(1) Kanwal Complex, B-32, A.G. Office Gwalior M.P. Road, Gwalior M.P. 474001 Pan: Aabcp2035Q (Respondent) (Appellant) Assessment Year: 2019-20 Karam Udyog Vs. Jo Circle - 1(1)(1) 9, Gailana Road Agra U.P. Agra U.P. Pan: Abbfk0897L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 139Section 142Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 36(1)(v)Section 36(1)(va)Section 438Section 43B

…ITA No. 62/Agr/2021 AND OTHERS In the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Agra Bench, Agra Before : Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Accountant Member And Sh. Laliet Kumar, Judicial Member Assessment year: 2018-19 Sharda Oil Industries Pvt. Ltd. vs. JO Circle-2(1)(1), 17, Tundla Road, Nunhai AgraU.P. AgraU.P. PAN: AAECS1396L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment year: 2019-20 Prem Motors Pvt. Ltd. vs. JO DCIT/ACIT, Circle-1(1) Kanwal Complex, B-32, A.G. Office Gwalior M.P. Road, Gwalior M.P. 474001 PAN: AABCP2035Q (Respondent) (Appellant) Assessment year: 2019-20 Karam Udyog vs. JO Circle - 1(1)(1) 9, Gailana Road Agra U.P. Agra…

Karam Udhog, Agra vs. J.A.O., Dy. CIT.., Circle-1(1)(1), Agra

In the result all the appeals filed by the

ITA 112/AGR/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 Mar 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: : Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2018-19 Sharda Oil Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Jo Circle-2(1)(1), 17, Tundla Road, Nunhai Agrau.P. Agrau.P. Pan: Aaecs1396L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2019-20 Prem Motors Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Jo Dcit/Acit, Circle-1(1) Kanwal Complex, B-32, A.G. Office Gwalior M.P. Road, Gwalior M.P. 474001 Pan: Aabcp2035Q (Respondent) (Appellant) Assessment Year: 2019-20 Karam Udyog Vs. Jo Circle - 1(1)(1) 9, Gailana Road Agra U.P. Agra U.P. Pan: Abbfk0897L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 139Section 142Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 36(1)(v)Section 36(1)(va)Section 438Section 43B

…ITA No. 62/Agr/2021 AND OTHERS In the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Agra Bench, Agra Before : Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Accountant Member And Sh. Laliet Kumar, Judicial Member Assessment year: 2018-19 Sharda Oil Industries Pvt. Ltd. vs. JO Circle-2(1)(1), 17, Tundla Road, Nunhai AgraU.P. AgraU.P. PAN: AAECS1396L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment year: 2019-20 Prem Motors Pvt. Ltd. vs. JO DCIT/ACIT, Circle-1(1) Kanwal Complex, B-32, A.G. Office Gwalior M.P. Road, Gwalior M.P. 474001 PAN: AABCP2035Q (Respondent) (Appellant) Assessment year: 2019-20 Karam Udyog vs. JO Circle - 1(1)(1) 9, Gailana Road Agra U.P. Agra…

Prem Motors Private Limited, Gwalior vs. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, DCIT/ACIT, Circle1(1), Gwalior

In the result all the appeals filed by the

ITA 100/AGR/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 Mar 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: : Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2018-19 Sharda Oil Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Jo Circle-2(1)(1), 17, Tundla Road, Nunhai Agrau.P. Agrau.P. Pan: Aaecs1396L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2019-20 Prem Motors Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Jo Dcit/Acit, Circle-1(1) Kanwal Complex, B-32, A.G. Office Gwalior M.P. Road, Gwalior M.P. 474001 Pan: Aabcp2035Q (Respondent) (Appellant) Assessment Year: 2019-20 Karam Udyog Vs. Jo Circle - 1(1)(1) 9, Gailana Road Agra U.P. Agra U.P. Pan: Abbfk0897L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 139Section 142Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 36(1)(v)Section 36(1)(va)Section 438Section 43B

…ITA No. 62/Agr/2021 AND OTHERS In the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Agra Bench, Agra Before : Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Accountant Member And Sh. Laliet Kumar, Judicial Member Assessment year: 2018-19 Sharda Oil Industries Pvt. Ltd. vs. JO Circle-2(1)(1), 17, Tundla Road, Nunhai AgraU.P. AgraU.P. PAN: AAECS1396L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment year: 2019-20 Prem Motors Pvt. Ltd. vs. JO DCIT/ACIT, Circle-1(1) Kanwal Complex, B-32, A.G. Office Gwalior M.P. Road, Gwalior M.P. 474001 PAN: AABCP2035Q (Respondent) (Appellant) Assessment year: 2019-20 Karam Udyog vs. JO Circle - 1(1)(1) 9, Gailana Road Agra U.P. Agra…

Ram Kumar Tomar, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 34(1), New Delhi

In the result appeal filed by the Assesses is allowed

ITA 1730/DEL/2020[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shrianil Chaturvedi & Shri N. K. Choudhry(Through Video Conferencing) Ram Kumar Tomar, Vs. Ito, C-40, Shakti Nagar Extension, Ward-34(1), New Delhi D New Delhi Pan: Aadpt6457D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: ShriAmitGoel, Ld. CAFor Respondent: ShriVipulKashyap
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 250Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

…ct, hence no disallowance is warranted. In support of its contention the Assessee 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 and by Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. AIMIL Ltd 321 ITR 508. 5.3 On the contrary Ld. DR refuted the claim of the Assessee and relied upon various judgments of the Hon‟ble High Courts against the contention and claim of the Assessee, such as in the case of CIT Vs M/s. Bharat Hotels Ltd., [2019]…