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.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Alom Extrusions Ltd.?

1,344 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Alom Extrusions Ltd. (319 ITR 306), spanning 2012 to 2026.

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

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 36(1)(va), Section 43B, Section 143(3), Section 2(24)(x), Section 143(1), Section 143(1)(a).

CIT v. Alom Extrusions Ltd. (319 ITR 306)

Loot India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 7(3), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee and Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 3025/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Sept 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm

For Appellant: Shri R. P. Meena & Shri Sridhar E

Section 1Section 139(5)Section 147

…e by 10 M/s. Loot (India) Private Limited referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd. [2015] 53 taxmann.com 141 (Bom) and the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Alom Extrusion 319 ITR 306 (SC) for the proposition that the payments before the due date of filing the return is permissible. Hence, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A) on this issue. Hence, we uphold the same. 25. In the result, all the appeals by the assessee and Revenue are partly allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 18.09.2018 (San…

M/S. Mahati Software Pvt. Ltd., Visakhapatnam vs. The ACIT, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 68/VIZ/2017[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam07 Sept 2018AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.67/Viz/2016 & 68/Viz/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2011-12 & 2012-13) M/S Mahati Software Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of D.No.10-27-14A Income Tax Sivam, Kailashmetta Circle-3(1) Waltair Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aadcm9620J] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal, DR

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 144Section 144C(1)Section 194JSection 40

…favour of the assessee and against the revenue. We extract relevant part in page No.12 of the order which reads as under : “12. By reason of the judgment of the Supreme Court in CIT vs. Alom Extrusions Ltd. (2009) 227 CUR (SC) 417 (2009) 32 (Sc) DTR 4 (2009) 319 ITR 306 (Sc) the employers 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 A0 has not, the Court is informed, been challenged by the assesses. As a matter of f…

Mahati Software Pvt Ltd., Visakhapatnam vs. The ACIT, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 67/VIZ/2016[20011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam07 Sept 2018

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.67/Viz/2016 & 68/Viz/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2011-12 & 2012-13) M/S Mahati Software Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of D.No.10-27-14A Income Tax Sivam, Kailashmetta Circle-3(1) Waltair Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aadcm9620J] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal, DR

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 144Section 144C(1)Section 194JSection 40

…favour of the assessee and against the revenue. We extract relevant part in page No.12 of the order which reads as under : “12. By reason of the judgment of the Supreme Court in CIT vs. Alom Extrusions Ltd. (2009) 227 CUR (SC) 417 (2009) 32 (Sc) DTR 4 (2009) 319 ITR 306 (Sc) the employers 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 A0 has not, the Court is informed, been challenged by the assesses. As a matter of f…

ITO WD 1(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Kesar Petroproducts Ltd, Ratnagiri

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue and assessee are dismissed

ITA 1169/MUM/2014[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm

Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…only on the ground of sales tax refund as trade receipts, which has been assessed by the AO under the head ‘income from other sources’. Reliance was placed on the following judicial pronouncements. Sr. No. Description Citation 1 C1T--VS- Alom Extrusions Lid. 319 ITR 306 2 Price Water Coopers Pvt. Ltd. -vs- C1T 348 ITR 306 3 ShivLalTak-vs-CIT 251 ITR 37 3 4 National Textiles -vs- CIT 249 H'R 125 5 ITO -vs- Roborant Investments P. Lid. 7 SOT 181 6 Kotak Mahindra Old Mutual Life \ 15 SOT 722 Insurance Co. Ltd. —vs- ITO 7 ACIT--vs- ShivKadar 15 SOT 57 8 CIT -vs- Ram Commercial Enterprises 246 ITR 568 Ltd. 9 IT. A…

ACIT, CC-3(2), Kolkata vs. M/S. Narayani Sons. Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 1798/KOL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Aug 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 43B

…of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and thus, the issues stand covered in favour of the assessee. It is to be noted that the jurisdictional Court while passing the judgment in C.I.T. vs. Vijay Shree [supra) had followed the judgment in C.I.T. vs. Alom Extrusions Ltd. 319 ITR 306 [SC) wherein it has been held that amendment to the second proviso to section 43B of the Act as introduced by Finance Act, 2003 was curative in nature and is required to be applied retrospectively with effect from 1st April, 1988. Mr. Khaitan submits save and except the judgment in C.I.T. vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation : 233 Taxmann…

ACIT, CC-3(2), Kolkata vs. M/S. Narayani Sons. Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 1797/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Aug 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 43B

…of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and thus, the issues stand covered in favour of the assessee. It is to be noted that the jurisdictional Court while passing the judgment in C.I.T. vs. Vijay Shree [supra) had followed the judgment in C.I.T. vs. Alom Extrusions Ltd. 319 ITR 306 [SC) wherein it has been held that amendment to the second proviso to section 43B of the Act as introduced by Finance Act, 2003 was curative in nature and is required to be applied retrospectively with effect from 1st April, 1988. Mr. Khaitan submits save and except the judgment in C.I.T. vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation : 233 Taxmann…

ACIT, CC-3(2), Kolkata vs. M/S. Narayani Sons. Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 1796/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 43B

…of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and thus, the issues stand covered in favour of the assessee. It is to be noted that the jurisdictional Court while passing the judgment in C.I.T. vs. Vijay Shree [supra) had followed the judgment in C.I.T. vs. Alom Extrusions Ltd. 319 ITR 306 [SC) wherein it has been held that amendment to the second proviso to section 43B of the Act as introduced by Finance Act, 2003 was curative in nature and is required to be applied retrospectively with effect from 1st April, 1988. Mr. Khaitan submits save and except the judgment in C.I.T. vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation : 233 Taxmann…

Almighty Resources Pvt. Ltd., Alwar vs. Income Tax Officer, Bhiwadi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 679/JPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Aug 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: The Due Date Of Return. 3. The Delayed Payment In Respect Of Employees' Contribution To Pf & Esi Needs To Be Given Liberal Approach In View Of The Ratio Laid Down

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Balani (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Roshanta Meena (JCIT)

Section 1Section 139Section 139(1)Section 2Section 43B

…under but before the due date for furnishing the return of income under sub sec. 1 of sec. 139 of the Act, are allowable under s. 36(I)(va) read with sec. 2(24(x) and sec. 43B of the Act. Moreover, Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs Atom Extrusions Ltd. 319 ITR 306 (SC) held that the omission of the first proviso to section 43B of the Act by the Finance Act 2003, operated, retrospectively, with effect from, April 1, 1988 and not prospectively from April 1, 2004. 4. The Appellant craves leave to add, amend, modify, or withdraw any of the ground of appeal at the time of hearing.” 2. We have heard the ld. A.R…

ACIT Cir. 6 (3) (2), Mumbai vs. Khandelwal Laboratories Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby ordered to be dismissed

ITA 6034/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.6034/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Acit, Cir, 6(3)(2), R. No. बिधम/ M/S. Khandelwal 522, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Laboratories Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, 79/78, Lal Path, Mumbai-400020. Chinchpokli, Mumbai- 400033. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaack4225E (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Ram Tiwari (Sr. Ar) Assessee By: Shri Dhaval Shah सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 09.05.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 03.08.2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 20.07.2016 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -12, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2009- 10. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: - “1. "The Learned Cit(A) Has Grossly Erred On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case To Allow Relief To The Assesses By Relying Upon The Order Of The Itat Dated 23.06.2016, In The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The A.Y.2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Dhaval ShahFor Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari (Sr. AR)

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 94

…allowance - Certain deductions to be allowed only on actual payment (Employees' contribution) - whether both employees' and employer's contributions are covered under amendment to section 43B and judgment of Supreme court in CIT Vs. Alom Extrusions Ltd. [2D09]319 ITR 306/185 Taxman 416 - Held, yes - Whether thus Tribunal was right in holding that payments thereof are subject to benefits of section and hence, deduction was allowable - Held, yes (Para 16} [in favour of assessee] the case of Hindustan Organic Chemicals Ltd.(366 ITR 1) Hon'ble Court as under:- "I Section 43B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 - business dis…

M/S. Hitrac Manpower Services Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. Addl. CIT, Gurgaon

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and that

ITA 3726/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Joginder Singhdcit, Vs M/S Hitrac Manpower Service Pvt. Circle-2, Ltd. Gurgaon 85, Link Road, Bheem Nagar, Gurgaon, Pan-Aabch4230P Revenue Assessee M/S Hitrac Manpower Service Vs Dcit, Pvt. Ltd. Circle-2, 85, Link Road, Bheem Nagar, Gurgaon Gurgaon, Pan-Aabch4230P Assessee Revenue

Section 139(1)Section 2(24)(X)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…fore this Tribunal. 2.3. If the observation made in the assessment order, conclusion drawn in the impugned order, facts available on record, we find that the issue has been settled by Hon ‘ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs Alom Extrusion Limited (2009) 319 ITR 306(SC), CIT vs Vinay Cement Ltd. (2007) 213 CTR 268 and Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs AIMIL Ltd. (2010) 188 taxman 265 (Del.), wherein, it was held that employees contribution towards PF & ESI would qualify for deduction even it is paid after due date prescribed under provident fund Act and ESI Act but before due date of filing the return of…

DCIT, Gurgaon vs. M/S. Hitrac Manpower Services Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and that

ITA 1163/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Joginder Singhdcit, Vs M/S Hitrac Manpower Service Pvt. Circle-2, Ltd. Gurgaon 85, Link Road, Bheem Nagar, Gurgaon, Pan-Aabch4230P Revenue Assessee M/S Hitrac Manpower Service Vs Dcit, Pvt. Ltd. Circle-2, 85, Link Road, Bheem Nagar, Gurgaon Gurgaon, Pan-Aabch4230P Assessee Revenue

Section 139(1)Section 2(24)(X)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…fore this Tribunal. 2.3. If the observation made in the assessment order, conclusion drawn in the impugned order, facts available on record, we find that the issue has been settled by Hon ‘ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs Alom Extrusion Limited (2009) 319 ITR 306(SC), CIT vs Vinay Cement Ltd. (2007) 213 CTR 268 and Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs AIMIL Ltd. (2010) 188 taxman 265 (Del.), wherein, it was held that employees contribution towards PF & ESI would qualify for deduction even it is paid after due date prescribed under provident fund Act and ESI Act but before due date of filing the return of…

Bliss Tree Infracon Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 5(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 7546/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Mr. R.S. Syalassessment Year: 2014-15

Section 139(1)Section 43B

…be affirmed in the first appeal. 5. I have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant material on record. It is found that the issue raised here is no more res integra. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Alom Extrusions Limited (2009) 319 ITR 306 (SC) has held that the amendment to first proviso and omission of the second proviso to section 43B by the Finance Act, 2003 is retrospective. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Aimil Limited (2010) 321 ITR 508 (Delhi) has allowed deduction in respect of employees’ share when the amount was paid before the due date. When I consi…

Dhara Singh, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward-1(2), Ghaziabad

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 2213/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri T.S. Kapooray: 2012-13 Dhara Singh Ito, Ward 1(2), C/O Rupinder Kumar Vs. Ghaziabad Aggarwal, Uttar Pradesh Advocate, Ab-1A/22, Sector-51, Noida -201301 (Pan: Czjps0155A) (Assessee) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain, Adv., ShFor Respondent: Sh. V.K. Jiwani, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 234CSection 48Section 50CSection 54F

…effective from the date on which the related legal provisions were introduced. As I say so, in addition to the reasoning given earlier in this order, I may also refer to the observations of Hon'ble Supreme Court, the case of CIT v. Alom Extrusion Ltd. [(2009) 319 ITR 306], to the following effect: "Once this uniformity is brought about in the first proviso, then, in our view, the Finance Act, 2003, which is made applicable by the Parliament only w.e.f 1st April, 2004, would become curative in nature, hence, it would apply retrospectively w.e.f. 1st April 1988 (i.e. the date on which the related legal provision w…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(2), Hyderabad vs. Country Condo'S Limited, Hyderabad

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

ITA 118/HYD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B. Ramakotaiah & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadassessment Year: 2012-13 Dy. Cit, Vs. Country Condo’S Limited, Circle-1(2), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan – Aabcn3348N (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Smt. N. Swapna, Dr Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ar Assessee By : Date Of Hearing 17.07.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 18.07.2018

For Appellant: Date of hearingFor Respondent: Smt. N. Swapna, DR

Section 139(1)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH “B”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dy. CIT, vs. Country Condo’s Limited, Circle-1(2), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. PAN – AABCN3348N (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue by : Smt. N. Swapna, DR Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, AR Assessee by : Date of hearing 17.07.2018 Date of pronouncement 18.07.2018 O R D E R PER CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JM: This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-1, Hyderabad dated 22.09.2017 for the A.Y 2012- 13. The only gri…

The Asstt. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Srinagar vs. M/S. J&K Project Construction, Srinagar

In the result, as I am in concurrence with conclusion and reasoning given in rest part of the order dated 12

ITA 176/ASR/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar12 Jul 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. Nos. 100 & 101/Asr/2014 Assessment Years: 2007-08 & 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. Abdul Rashid Dulloo (C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Sandeep Chauhan, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

…nal in Jt. CIT v. ITC Ltd. [2008] 112 ITD 57 (Kol) (SB); ITO v. LKP Securities Ltd. [2013] 36 CCH 93 (Mum), and G.K. Management Services (India) Ltd. (in ITA No. 3316/Mds./2016, dated 31.08.2017). The decision in the case of CIT v. Alom Extrusions Ltd. [2009] 319 ITR 306 (SC), which is followed by different High Courts, claiming the same as covering the issue under reference, is, again, not applicable. The said decision concerns the amendment to section 43B by Finance Act, 2003 w.e.f., 01.04.2004, which the Apex Court has in that case clarified to operate retrospectively. The current year is a later year, to whic…

The Asstt. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Srinagar vs. M/S. J&K Project Construction, Srinagar

In the result, as I am in concurrence with conclusion and reasoning given in rest part of the order dated 12

ITA 175/ASR/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar12 Jul 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. Nos. 100 & 101/Asr/2014 Assessment Years: 2007-08 & 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. Abdul Rashid Dulloo (C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Sandeep Chauhan, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

…nal in Jt. CIT v. ITC Ltd. [2008] 112 ITD 57 (Kol) (SB); ITO v. LKP Securities Ltd. [2013] 36 CCH 93 (Mum), and G.K. Management Services (India) Ltd. (in ITA No. 3316/Mds./2016, dated 31.08.2017). The decision in the case of CIT v. Alom Extrusions Ltd. [2009] 319 ITR 306 (SC), which is followed by different High Courts, claiming the same as covering the issue under reference, is, again, not applicable. The said decision concerns the amendment to section 43B by Finance Act, 2003 w.e.f., 01.04.2004, which the Apex Court has in that case clarified to operate retrospectively. The current year is a later year, to whic…

M/S. Jammu & Kashmir Projects Construction, Jammu vs. The Assessing Officer, Srinagar

In the result, as I am in concurrence with conclusion and reasoning given in rest part of the order dated 12

ITA 101/ASR/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar12 Jul 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. Nos. 100 & 101/Asr/2014 Assessment Years: 2007-08 & 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. Abdul Rashid Dulloo (C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Sandeep Chauhan, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

…nal in Jt. CIT v. ITC Ltd. [2008] 112 ITD 57 (Kol) (SB); ITO v. LKP Securities Ltd. [2013] 36 CCH 93 (Mum), and G.K. Management Services (India) Ltd. (in ITA No. 3316/Mds./2016, dated 31.08.2017). The decision in the case of CIT v. Alom Extrusions Ltd. [2009] 319 ITR 306 (SC), which is followed by different High Courts, claiming the same as covering the issue under reference, is, again, not applicable. The said decision concerns the amendment to section 43B by Finance Act, 2003 w.e.f., 01.04.2004, which the Apex Court has in that case clarified to operate retrospectively. The current year is a later year, to whic…

M/S. Jammu & Kashmir Projects Construction, Jammu & Kashmir vs. The Assessing Officer, Srinagar

In the result, as I am in concurrence with conclusion and reasoning given in rest part of the order dated 12

ITA 100/ASR/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar12 Jul 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. Nos. 100 & 101/Asr/2014 Assessment Years: 2007-08 & 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. Abdul Rashid Dulloo (C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Sandeep Chauhan, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

…nal in Jt. CIT v. ITC Ltd. [2008] 112 ITD 57 (Kol) (SB); ITO v. LKP Securities Ltd. [2013] 36 CCH 93 (Mum), and G.K. Management Services (India) Ltd. (in ITA No. 3316/Mds./2016, dated 31.08.2017). The decision in the case of CIT v. Alom Extrusions Ltd. [2009] 319 ITR 306 (SC), which is followed by different High Courts, claiming the same as covering the issue under reference, is, again, not applicable. The said decision concerns the amendment to section 43B by Finance Act, 2003 w.e.f., 01.04.2004, which the Apex Court has in that case clarified to operate retrospectively. The current year is a later year, to whic…

ACIT Corporate Circle 5(2), Chennai vs. R P Telebuy Skyshop Private Limited, Chennai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2595/CHNY/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Jul 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Abraham P.George & Shri George Mathan

For Respondent: Shri. M. Veerabathran

Section 2(24)(x)Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…tional High Court in the case of Industrial Security & Intelligence India Pvt Ltd. (supra) is reproduced hereunder:- ’5. We find that the Tribunal has righty relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. 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 01.01.1988 i.e the date of insertion of first proviso. The Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Amil Ltd, reported in 321 ITR 508 held…

ACIT Corporate Circle 5(2), Chennai vs. Preludesys India Limited, Chennai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2594/CHNY/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Jul 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Abraham P.George & Shri George Mathan

For Appellant: Shri. M. Veerabathran

Section 2(24)(x)Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…tional High Court in the case of Industrial Security & Intelligence India Pvt Ltd. (supra) is reproduced hereunder:- ’5. We find that the Tribunal has righty relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. 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 01.01.1988 i.e the date of insertion of first proviso. The Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Amil Ltd, reported in 321 ITR 508 held…

CIT v. Alom Extrusions Ltd.

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

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Alom Extrusions Ltd.

Loot India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 7(3), Mumbai

M/S. Mahati Software Pvt. Ltd., Visakhapatnam vs. The ACIT, Visakhapatnam

Mahati Software Pvt Ltd., Visakhapatnam vs. The ACIT, Visakhapatnam

ITO WD 1(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Kesar Petroproducts Ltd, Ratnagiri

ACIT, CC-3(2), Kolkata vs. M/S. Narayani Sons. Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ACIT, CC-3(2), Kolkata vs. M/S. Narayani Sons. Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ACIT, CC-3(2), Kolkata vs. M/S. Narayani Sons. Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

Almighty Resources Pvt. Ltd., Alwar vs. Income Tax Officer, Bhiwadi

ACIT Cir. 6 (3) (2), Mumbai vs. Khandelwal Laboratories Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

M/S. Hitrac Manpower Services Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. Addl. CIT, Gurgaon

DCIT, Gurgaon vs. M/S. Hitrac Manpower Services Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon

Bliss Tree Infracon Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 5(1), New Delhi

Dhara Singh, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward-1(2), Ghaziabad

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(2), Hyderabad vs. Country Condo'S Limited, Hyderabad

The Asstt. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Srinagar vs. M/S. J&K Project Construction, Srinagar

The Asstt. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Srinagar vs. M/S. J&K Project Construction, Srinagar

M/S. Jammu & Kashmir Projects Construction, Jammu vs. The Assessing Officer, Srinagar

M/S. Jammu & Kashmir Projects Construction, Jammu & Kashmir vs. The Assessing Officer, Srinagar

ACIT Corporate Circle 5(2), Chennai vs. R P Telebuy Skyshop Private Limited, Chennai

ACIT Corporate Circle 5(2), Chennai vs. Preludesys India Limited, Chennai