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.

DCIT 15(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Techno Process Equipments (I) Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1312/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri Minhazali N. LadiwalaFor Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari
Section 139(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…unt of ` 3,46,807. Being aggrieved of such allowance, assessee preferred appeal before the first appellate authority. 4. After considering the submissions of the assessee and following the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT v/s Alom Extrusion Ltd., 319 ITR 306 (SC), the learned Commissioner (Appeals) having found that the employees contribution to Provident Fund and ESIC was 3 M/s. Techno Process paid within the due date of return of income to be filed under section 139(1) of the Act, allowed assessee’s claim of deduction. 5. The learned Departmental Representative relied upon the observations of the…

DCIT 15(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Ray Projects P. Ltd, Powai

In the result, this appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1313/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Virender SinghFor Respondent: Shri Ashok J. Patil
Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…micals Ltd. (366 ITR 1) held that 43B disallowance not applicable to payments made beyond the due date in respect of employees' contribution to PF/ESIC as per provisions of section 36(1)(va). Further, the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Alom Extrusion Ltd. (319 ITR 306) held that provisions to section 43B by Finance Act, 2003 is with retrospective effect from 1.4.1998. Accordingly, contribution payable by the employer to the PF or any other mode for the welfare of the employees was allowable if paid before the due date of filing return. In view of the above decisions, the additions made by the AO is unwarranted…

ITO, Ward - 4(4), Kolkata vs. M/S. Western Conglomerate Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2232/KOL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jun 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am] I.T.A. No. 2232/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Ito Ward 4(4)Kolkata.................................………………………………………....................Appellant P-7, Chowringhee Square, Aayakar Bhawan, 8Th Floor, Kolkata – 700 069. M/S. Western Conglomerate Ltd....................……………………………………………....Respondent 3A, Hare Street, Ashoka House, 3Rd Floor, Room No. 302, Kolkata – 700 001. [Pan: Aaact 9496 Q] Appearances By: Shri D.C. Mondal, Addl. Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Shri S.L. Kochar, Advocate Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 29, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 20, 2018 Order This Appeal Is Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A) – 2, Kolkata Dated 09.08.2017 Whereby He Deleted The Addition Of Rs. 85,87,070/- Made By The Ao On Account Of Disallowance Of Belated Payments Of Employees Contribution To Provident Fund Under Section 43B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The Assessee In The Present Case Is A Company Which Is Engaged In The Business Of Cultivation & Manufacturing Of Tea. The Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration Was Filed By It On 27.11.2014 Declaring A Total Income Of Rs. 36,320/-. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, It Was Noticed By The Ao That The Assessee Has Failed To Pay The Employees Contribution To Provident Fund Amounting To Rs. 85,87,070/- Within The Due Dates. He Accordingly Invoked The Provisions Of Section 2(24)(X) & Section 36(1)(Va) Of The Act & Made A Disallowance Of Rs. 85,87,070/-.

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

…the case of CIT vs Vijay Ltd. (ITA No. 245 of 2011 dated 06.09.2011) wherein a similar issue was decided by the Hon’ble Kolkata High Court in favour of the assessee by following the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Alom Extrusions Ltd. 319 ITR 306. Respectfully following the said judicial pronouncements, I uphold the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) giving relief to the assessee on this issue and dismiss this appeal of the revenue. 5. In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 20th June, 2018. (P.M. Jagtap) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 20/06/…

DCIT Corporate Circle 4(1), Chennai vs. Malabar Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1801/CHNY/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1801/Chny/2017. "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2014-2015. The Deputy Commissioner Vs. M/S. Malabar Hotels Pvt. Ltd, Of Income Tax, No.1/238, Old Mahabalipuram Road, Corporate Circle 4(1) Semmencherry, Chennai 600 034. Chennai 600 119. [Pan Aadcm 5836G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Dr. S. Pandiyan, Addl. CITFor Respondent: None
Section 36Section 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…

DCIT, Circle-11(1), Kolkata vs. M/S J.J.Exports Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 149/KOL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 May 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.149/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Dcit, Cir-11(1), Kolkata Vs. M/S. J. J. Exporters Ltd.

For Appellant: Shri Arindam Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri S. Jhajharia, FCA
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D”, BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI A. T. VARKEY, JM &DR. A.L.SAINI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.149/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) DCIT, Cir-11(1), Kolkata Vs. M/s. J. J. Exporters Ltd. 23, Ashutosh Avenue, Kolkata – 700 P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata – 700 019. 069. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. :AAACJ 6722 H (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by :Shri Arindam Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT(DR) Respondent by : Shri S. Jhajharia, FCA सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date of Hearing : 18/04/2018 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 30/05/2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini:…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur vs. Rajasthan Avas Vikas & Infrastructure Limited, Jaipur

In the result, the Revenue appeal is dismissed

ITA 486/JPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 May 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: The Hearing."

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Anoop Singh (Addl.CIT)
Section 192Section 199Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…va) and 438 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 - Business Expenditure - Disallowance - Assessee entitled to deduction in respect of payment for GPF, CPF and ESI as the same has been deposited prior to the filing of return of income u/s 139(1). Alom Extrasions (2009) 319 ITR 306 (SC): Business expenditure-Deduction on actual payment-Contribution to provident fund- Existing provision creating difficulties- Amendment to remove difficulty-Has retrospective effect- Finance Act, 2003, making amendment but as if with effect from April 1, 2004-To be read as having retrospective effect from April 1,1988-Income-tax Act, 1961, s.…

M/S.Us Technology Resources P. Ltd, Trivandrum vs. The DCIT, Trivandrum

In the result, the appeal for assessment year 2011-2012

ITA 475/COCH/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin11 May 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Raghunathan S., AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri. Santham Bose, CIT-DR
Section 144C(5)Section 190Section 194JSection 234BSection 40Section 92C(3)

…behind the enactment. The aforesaid view has consistently been followed by this Court in the following cases, viz., Whirlpool of India Ltd., v. CIT, New Delhi [2000] 245 ITR 3, CIT v. Amrit Banaspati [2002] 255 ITR 117 and CIT v. Alom Enterprises Ltd. [2009] 319 ITR 306. 30. Hence, in light of the forgoing discussion and the binding effect of the judgment given in Allied Moters (supra), we are of the view that the amended provision of See 40(a)(ia) of the IT Act should be interpreted liberally and equitable and applies retrospectively from the date when Section 40(a)(ia) was inserted i.e., with effect from the A…

M/S.Us Technology Resources P. Ltd, Trivandrum vs. The ACIT, Trivandrum

In the result, the appeal for assessment year 2011-2012

ITA 134/COCH/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin11 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Raghunathan S., AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri. Santham Bose, CIT-DR
Section 144C(5)Section 190Section 194JSection 234BSection 40Section 92C(3)

…behind the enactment. The aforesaid view has consistently been followed by this Court in the following cases, viz., Whirlpool of India Ltd., v. CIT, New Delhi [2000] 245 ITR 3, CIT v. Amrit Banaspati [2002] 255 ITR 117 and CIT v. Alom Enterprises Ltd. [2009] 319 ITR 306. 30. Hence, in light of the forgoing discussion and the binding effect of the judgment given in Allied Moters (supra), we are of the view that the amended provision of See 40(a)(ia) of the IT Act should be interpreted liberally and equitable and applies retrospectively from the date when Section 40(a)(ia) was inserted i.e., with effect from the A…

Annapurna Studios Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-14(5), Hyderabad

In the result, as pronounced in the open court, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1290/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 May 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri D. Manmohan & Shri B. Ramakotaiah

For Appellant: Shri V. Siva Kumar, ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Naveen, DR
Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ight delay within the financial year. I.T.A. No. 1290/Hyd/2017 :- 2 -: 2. Ld. Counsel for the assessee relied upon the decisions of the ITAT, Hyderabad Bench and also the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Alom Extrusions Limited [319 ITR 306] (SC) to submit that disallowance is not called for if the payment is made before filing of return of income. The AO rejected the contention of the assessee on the ground that the provisions of Section 36(1)(va) get automatically attracted when the payment is not made within the due dates prescribed there under. 3. Aggrieved, assessee contended…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Granules India Limited, Hyderabad

ITA 1282/HYD/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 May 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri D. Manmohan & Shri B. Ramakotaiah

For Appellant: NONEFor Respondent: Shri M. Naveen, DR
Section 139(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ecision of the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Merchem Ltd., [378 ITR 443] and also Circular No. 22/2015, dt. 17-12-2015, issued by the CBDT to submit that the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. Alom Extrusions Limited [319 ITR 306] (SC) is limited to the application of Section 43B, whereas in the instant case, Section 36(1)(va) was applied by the AO which is independent on the provisions of Section 43B. 5. None appeared on behalf of the assessee. 6. We have carefully considered the rival contentions and perused the record. Identical issue was decided by the Co-ordinate B…

AO, ACIT, Circle-40, Kolkata vs. Truckers India, Kolkata

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

ITA 2050/KOL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 May 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: : Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravia.Y 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Arindam Bhattacharjee, Addl.CIT, ld.Sr.DRFor Respondent: None appeared
Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

…ore the CIT-A and submitted that the employees’ contribution was deposited before filing of return of income and it is an an allowable deduction and placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Alom Extrusions Ltd reported in (2009) 319 ITR 306(SC) in support of its claim. 6. The CIT-A placing reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Alom Extrusions Ltd. reported in (2009) 319 ITR 306(SC) deleted the impugned addition made on account of delayed payment of PF & ESI. Relevant portion of finding of the CIT-A in this regard is reproduced herein below for better unde…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur vs. M/S Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Ltd., Jaipur

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

ITA 977/JPR/2017[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 May 2018AY 2001-02
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. Roli Agarwal (CIT)
Section 139Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ate under the respective Acts but before filing of return of income U/s 139, the same cannot be disallowed U/s 43B or U/s 36(1)(va) of the Act. Thereafter the ld. CIT(A) referred to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. Alom Extrusions Ltd. 319 ITR 306 and directed the AO DCIT vs. M/s Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Ltd.and others to verify the dates of payments of employee’s contribution towards PF and ESI and delete the addition made on this account, if the payments have been made before the due date of filing of return of income by the appellant. 4. During the course of hearing, the l…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur vs. Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Ltd., Jaipur

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

ITA 972/JPR/2017[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 May 2018AY 2001-02
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. Roli Agarwal (CIT)
Section 139Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ate under the respective Acts but before filing of return of income U/s 139, the same cannot be disallowed U/s 43B or U/s 36(1)(va) of the Act. Thereafter the ld. CIT(A) referred to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. Alom Extrusions Ltd. 319 ITR 306 and directed the AO DCIT vs. M/s Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Ltd.and others to verify the dates of payments of employee’s contribution towards PF and ESI and delete the addition made on this account, if the payments have been made before the due date of filing of return of income by the appellant. 4. During the course of hearing, the l…

DCIT Corporate Circle 4(2), Chennai vs. Neycer India Limited, Chennai

ITA 1802/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 May 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1802/Chny/2017 & C.O.No.133/Chny/2017 (In Ita No.1802/Chny/2017) "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2013-2014. The Deputy Commissioner Vs. M/S. Neycer India Limited, Of Income Tax, Manasa, No.145, Corporate Circle 4(2) St. Mary’S Road, Alwarpet, Chennai 600 034 Chennai 600 018

For Respondent: Shri. AR.V. Sreenivasan, IRS, JCIT
Section 154Section 36Section 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…

ITO Corporate Ward 4(4), Chennai vs. Lamis Outsourcing Solutions Private Limited, Chennai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1756/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 May 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George] आयकर अपील सं. Ita No.1756/Chny/2017) "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2013-2014. The Income Tax Officer, Vs. M/S. Lamis Outsourcing Solutions Corporate Ward 4(4) Private Limited, Chennai 600 034. A/4/3, Gemini Parsn Apartments, No.600, Mount Road, (Near Cathedral Garden Road) Chennai 600 006. [Pan Aabcl 4936A] (Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant)

For Appellant: Shri. AR.V. Sreenivasan, IRS, JCITFor Respondent: Shri. J.C. Prakash, C.A
Section 36Section 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…

DCIT Corporate Circle 2(2), Chennai vs. Hinduja Foundries Ltd., Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2693/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 May 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri N. Madhavan, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Parida, Advocate

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘‘सी’’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी धु"वु" आर.एल रे"डी, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य के सम" Before Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member & Shri S. Jayaraman, Accountant Member I.T.A. Nos. 2690, 2691, 2692 and 2693/Mds/2017 Assessment Years:2008-09, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 The Deputy Commissioner of M/s. Hinduja Foundries Ltd., Income Tax, Corporate Circle 2(2), Vs. [Merged with M/s. Ashok Leyland Ltd.] Room No. 512, 5th Floor, Wanaparthy Kathivakkam High Road, Block, 121, M.G. Road, Ennore, Chennai 600 057. Chennai 600 034. [PAN:AAACE…

DCIT Corporate Circle 2(2), Chennai vs. Hinduja Foundries Ltd., Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2692/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 May 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri N. Madhavan, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Parida, Advocate

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘‘सी’’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी धु"वु" आर.एल रे"डी, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य के सम" Before Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member & Shri S. Jayaraman, Accountant Member I.T.A. Nos. 2690, 2691, 2692 and 2693/Mds/2017 Assessment Years:2008-09, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 The Deputy Commissioner of M/s. Hinduja Foundries Ltd., Income Tax, Corporate Circle 2(2), Vs. [Merged with M/s. Ashok Leyland Ltd.] Room No. 512, 5th Floor, Wanaparthy Kathivakkam High Road, Block, 121, M.G. Road, Ennore, Chennai 600 057. Chennai 600 034. [PAN:AAACE…

DCIT Corporate Circle 2(2), Chennai vs. Hinduja Foundries Ltd., Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2691/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri N. Madhavan, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Parida, Advocate

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘‘सी’’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी धु"वु" आर.एल रे"डी, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य के सम" Before Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member & Shri S. Jayaraman, Accountant Member I.T.A. Nos. 2690, 2691, 2692 and 2693/Mds/2017 Assessment Years:2008-09, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 The Deputy Commissioner of M/s. Hinduja Foundries Ltd., Income Tax, Corporate Circle 2(2), Vs. [Merged with M/s. Ashok Leyland Ltd.] Room No. 512, 5th Floor, Wanaparthy Kathivakkam High Road, Block, 121, M.G. Road, Ennore, Chennai 600 057. Chennai 600 034. [PAN:AAACE…

DCIT Corporate Circle 2(2), Chennai vs. Hinduja Foundries Ltd., Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2690/CHNY/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 May 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri N. Madhavan, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Parida, Advocate

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘‘सी’’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी धु"वु" आर.एल रे"डी, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य के सम" Before Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member & Shri S. Jayaraman, Accountant Member I.T.A. Nos. 2690, 2691, 2692 and 2693/Mds/2017 Assessment Years:2008-09, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 The Deputy Commissioner of M/s. Hinduja Foundries Ltd., Income Tax, Corporate Circle 2(2), Vs. [Merged with M/s. Ashok Leyland Ltd.] Room No. 512, 5th Floor, Wanaparthy Kathivakkam High Road, Block, 121, M.G. Road, Ennore, Chennai 600 057. Chennai 600 034. [PAN:AAACE…

ITO Company Ward 5(3), Chennai vs. Q Source Global Consulting Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the Revenue appeals in ITA No

ITA 2062/CHNY/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 May 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 1260 & 2062/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S. Nataraja, JCIT
Section 139(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 201(1)Section 40

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण ,’सी’ "यायपीठ,चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, CHENNAI "ी जॉज"माथन,"या"यक सद"यएवं"ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य केसम$ BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 1260 & 2062/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, M/s Q. Source Global Consulting Company Ward -5(3), Vs. Pvt. Ltd., Chennai – 600 034. S-16, Thiru Vi Ka Industrial Estate, Siddarth, 15th Main Road, Guindy, Chennai – 600 028. [PAN: AAACQ 1521H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Revenue by : Shri S. Nataraja, JCI…