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.

ITO, Chennai vs. Q.Source Global Consulting Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the Revenue appeals in ITA No

ITA 1260/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 May 2018AY 2013-14

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…

Darshan Vijaysinh Bhatia, Hyderabad vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-11(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1894/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Apr 2018AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Ajay GandhiFor Respondent: Shri B. Suresh Babu
Section 139(1)Section 2(24)Section 2(24)(x)Section 43B

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH “A-SMC”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2013-14 Shri Darshan Vijaysinh vs. ACIT, Bhatia, Circle-11(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. PAN- ABXPB8421E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Ajay Gandhi Revenue by : Shri B. Suresh Babu Date of hearing : 25-04-2018 Date of pronouncement : 27-04-2018 ORDER PER SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH, AM: This is an appeal by Assessee against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-5, Hyderabad dated 28.06.2017. The issue in this appeal by Assessee is with reference to disallowance of an amount Rs. 6,25,027/- as…

DCIT 12(2)(1), Mumbai vs. First Flight Couriers P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals for the AY 2011-12 and AY 2012-13 are dismissed

ITA 5399/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dy. Commissioner Of M/S First Flight Couriers Pvt. Income Tax-12(2)(1), Room Vs. Ltd. G 1001/02, Lotus No. 223, 2Nd Floor, Aayakar Corporation Park, Off Jay Coach Bhavan, M.K. Road Flyover, Western Exp. Highway, Mumbai-400020. Graham Firth Steel Comp, Goregaon (East), Mumbai-400064. Pan No. Aaacf0841R (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Ms. Pooja Swaroop, Dr Assessee By : Mr. Brijmohan Pooranmal Agarwal, Ar Date Of Hearing : 05/04/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 26/04/2018

For Appellant: Mr. Brijmohan PooranmalFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swaroop, DR
Section 143(3)

…of delay in payment of Employees’ contribution to ESIC and PF. The Revenue filed appeal before the ITAT against the said order of the Ld. CIT(A). The Tribunal upheld the order of the Ld. CIT(A), following the decision in CIT v. M/s Alom Etrusions Ltd. (2009) 319 ITR 306 (SC) and CIT v. M/s Hindustan Organics Chemicals Ltd. 366 ITR 1 (Bom). Facts being identical, we follow the said order of the Co-ordinate Bench in assessee’s own case for the AY 2011-12 and uphold the order of the Ld. CIT(A). Thus the 2nd ground of appeal is dismissed. 12. In the result, the appeal filed for the A.Y. 2011-12 is dismissed. M/s Fi…

Commissioner of Income Tax Kolkata XII vs. M/S Calcutta Export Company

C.A. No.-004339-004340 - 2018Supreme Court24 Apr 2018

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. AGRAWAL

…24 enactment. The aforesaid view has consistently been followed by this Court in the following cases, viz., Whirlpool of India Ltd., vs. CIT, New Delhi (2000) 245 ITR 3, CIT vs. Amrit Banaspati (2002) 255 ITR 117 and CIT vs. 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 Sec 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 fro…

DCIT, Circle-10(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Bridge & Roof Co. (India) Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purpose as indicated above

ITA 2176/KOL/2016[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Apr 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2014-15 Dcit, Circle10(1), V/S. M/S Bridge & Roof Co. Aayakar Bhawan, 3Rd (India) Ltd., 2?1, Russel Street, 5Th Floor, Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-69 Kolkata-71 [Pan No.Aabcb 3166 E] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Md. Usman, Cit-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri P.K. Agarwallaa, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 12-02-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 20-04-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Kolkata Dated 16.08.2016. Assessment Was Framed By Dcit, Circle-10(1), Kolkata U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Vide His Order Dated 28.03.2016 For Assessment Year 2014-15. The Grounds Raised By Revenue, Which Reads As Under:- “1. Whether The Ld. Cit(A) Was Correct In Holding That The Customers Of The Assessee Have Settled The Accounts Permanently After Deducting The Liquidated Damages & They Have Refused To Pay The Amount Forever? Was Not He Wrong In Holding That The Assessee Company Has Extinguished Its Right To Receive Money From Its Clients? 2. Whether The Ld. Cit(A) Was Correct In Deleting The Addition On Account Of Entertainment Expenses Despite The Fact That The Assessee Could Not Produce Any Documentary Evidence In Support Of Its Claim? Has Not The Ao The Right To Enquire Into Purpose Of Expenditure & Does The Doctrine That The Businessman Is The Best Judge Of Business Expediency Affect The Rights And

Section 143(3)

…of the Act, the same would qualify for deduction. In this respect, the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs. Vijay Shree Ltd. held, after referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of CIT vs. Alom Extrusions Ltd. 319 ITR 306, that the deposit of the Employees contribution to Provident Fund and ESSI would be allowable if the same is deposited within the due date of filing return of income. In keeping with the aforesaid view, I do not find any premise to sustain the action of the AO when the said impugned amount were said to be deposited before the due date of filing o…

ACIT, Circle -1(1), Visakhapatnam vs. Bharat Heavy Plate and Vessels Ltd, Visakhapatnam

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

ITA 439/VIZ/2017[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam21 Mar 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran, Hon’Ble & Shri Duvvuru R.L. Reddy, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri I. Kama Sastry – CAFor Respondent: Shri Deba Kumar Sonawal – CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 253Section 36(1)(va)

…before the due date for filing of the return of income. In the case of CIT Vs. Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sangh Ltd. 35 Taxmann 616, the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan after referring to the Apex Court decision in the ease of CIT Vs.Alom Extrusions Ltd. (319 ITR 306) & CIT Vs. Vinay Cement Ltd. (213 CIR 268 SC) held that the deduction should be allowed for the payment of., employees contribution made before the due date of filing of return. Similarly in the case of CIT Vs. State Bank of Bikaner, the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court held that the PF contribution paid after the due date under the respective Act bu…

ACIT, Circle -1(1), Visakhapatnam vs. Bharat Heavy Plate and Vessels Ltd, Visakhapatnam

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

ITA 438/VIZ/2017[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam21 Mar 2018AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran, Hon’Ble & Shri Duvvuru R.L. Reddy, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri I. Kama Sastry – CAFor Respondent: Shri Deba Kumar Sonawal – CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 253Section 36(1)(va)

…before the due date for filing of the return of income. In the case of CIT Vs. Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sangh Ltd. 35 Taxmann 616, the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan after referring to the Apex Court decision in the ease of CIT Vs.Alom Extrusions Ltd. (319 ITR 306) & CIT Vs. Vinay Cement Ltd. (213 CIR 268 SC) held that the deduction should be allowed for the payment of., employees contribution made before the due date of filing of return. Similarly in the case of CIT Vs. State Bank of Bikaner, the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court held that the PF contribution paid after the due date under the respective Act bu…

Bharat Heavy Plate & Vessels Limited, Now Known As Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited (Hpvp Unit), Visakhapatnam vs. DCIT, Circle-3(1), Visakhapatnam

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

ITA 406/VIZ/2017[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam21 Mar 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran, Hon’Ble & Shri Duvvuru R.L. Reddy, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri I. Kama Sastry – CAFor Respondent: Shri Deba Kumar Sonawal – CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 253Section 36(1)(va)

…before the due date for filing of the return of income. In the case of CIT Vs. Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sangh Ltd. 35 Taxmann 616, the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan after referring to the Apex Court decision in the ease of CIT Vs.Alom Extrusions Ltd. (319 ITR 306) & CIT Vs. Vinay Cement Ltd. (213 CIR 268 SC) held that the deduction should be allowed for the payment of., employees contribution made before the due date of filing of return. Similarly in the case of CIT Vs. State Bank of Bikaner, the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court held that the PF contribution paid after the due date under the respective Act bu…

Bharat Heavy Plate & Vessels Limited, Now Known As Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited (Hpvp Unit), Visakhapatnam vs. DCIT, Circle-3(1), Visakhapatnam

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

ITA 405/VIZ/2017[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam21 Mar 2018AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran, Hon’Ble & Shri Duvvuru R.L. Reddy, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri I. Kama Sastry – CAFor Respondent: Shri Deba Kumar Sonawal – CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 253Section 36(1)(va)

…before the due date for filing of the return of income. In the case of CIT Vs. Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sangh Ltd. 35 Taxmann 616, the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan after referring to the Apex Court decision in the ease of CIT Vs.Alom Extrusions Ltd. (319 ITR 306) & CIT Vs. Vinay Cement Ltd. (213 CIR 268 SC) held that the deduction should be allowed for the payment of., employees contribution made before the due date of filing of return. Similarly in the case of CIT Vs. State Bank of Bikaner, the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court held that the PF contribution paid after the due date under the respective Act bu…

Tiger Steel Engineering (India) P.Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT 10(3), Mumbai

ITA 5860/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Ramit Kochar, Am Tiger Steel Engineering The Dy. Commissioner Of (India) Pvt. Ltd Income Tax Circle 15(3)(1), 4Th Floor, Bldg No. 5, Sector Dy. Commissioner Of Iii, Millennium Business Park, Income Tax 10(3), 4 Th Floor, Vs. Mahape, Navi Room No. 451, Aayakar Mumbai-400 710 Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 Appellant .. Respondent Pan No. Aaact2537J Assessee By : None Revenue By : V Justin, Dr

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: V Justin, DR
Section 143(3)(ii)Section 37Section 43B

…igh Court has observed as under: - “8. The section referred to above viz. section 43B and the amendments thereto came up for consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v/s Alom Extrusions Ltd., reported in (2009) 319 ITR 306 (SC) when the Supreme Court inter alia held that the amendments to the said section brought about by the Finance Act, 2003 with effect from 1 st April 2004 were retrospective in nature and would operate from 1 st April 1988. The ITAT, relying upon the aforesaid judgment of the Supreme Court, has dismissed the Revenue’s Appeal and confirmed the or…

ACIT, Central Circle-1(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Adhunik Alloys & Power Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue ( Ground No

ITA 207/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Mar 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkeyand Dr.A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2013-14 Acit, Central Circle- V/S. M/S Adhunik Alloys & 1(1), Aaykar Bhawan, Power Ltd., Poorva, 110, 14, N.S. Road, 2Nd Floor, Shantipally, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata-700 001 Kolkata-700 107 [Pan No.Aaeca 5290 R] अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent .. अपीलाथ"क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Arindam Bhattacherjee, Addl. Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent Mrs. Shikha Agarwal, Aca सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 05-03-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 16-03-2018 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. A.L. Saini, Accountantmember:- This Caption Appeal Filed By The Revenue, Pertaining To Assessment Year2013-14, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-20, Kolkata,In Appeal No.1042/Cit(A)/20/Cc-1(1)/15- 16, Dated 10.11.2016, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By Assessing Officer U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 31.07.2015. 2.The Revenue Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1) Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Facts As Well As In Law By Deleting The Disallowance Of Rs.26,31,856/- Made For Delay In Deposit Of Employee’S Contribution Towards Provident Fund & Esi & Allowing Relief Under

Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…tion was made before due date of filing return of income u/s.139(1) of the Act for the year and as such, same is allowable a business expenditure. For that we rely on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s Alom Extrusions Ltd. (2009) 319 ITR 306 (SC), wherein it was held that the contribution towards provided fund vis-à-vis omission of second proviso to Section 43B – relaxation allowed by proviso to Section 43B was restricted only to tax, duty, cess and fee, and ITA No.207/Kol/2017 A.Y. 2013-14 ACIT CC-1(1) Kol. Vs. M/s Adhunik Alloys & Power Ltd. Page 4 did not apply to contributions to…

DCIT, Cir-12(1)/Kolkata, Kolkata vs. M/S Jct Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, this ground of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 345/KOL/2015[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Mar 2018AY 1999-2000

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi] I.T.A. No. 228/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 1999-2000

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)Section 43B

…ann.com 260 (Kolkata - Trib.), wherein at para 7, it has been held as follows:- “7. After considering the rival submissions and perusing the relevant materials on record, we find that the hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Alom Extrusions Ltd. [2009] 319 ITR 306/185 Taxman 416 has held that the amendment to the first proviso and the omission of the second proviso to section 43B by the Finance Act, 2003 to be retrospective. It has been held by the hon'ble apex court in the case of CIT v. Vinay Cement Ltd. [2007] 313 ITR (St.) 1 (FRSC) that the amount of employees' provident fund deposited before the due d…

Jct Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-12(1)/Kolkata, Kolkata

In the result, this ground of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 228/KOL/2015[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Mar 2018AY 1999-2000

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi] I.T.A. No. 228/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 1999-2000

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)Section 43B

…ann.com 260 (Kolkata - Trib.), wherein at para 7, it has been held as follows:- “7. After considering the rival submissions and perusing the relevant materials on record, we find that the hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Alom Extrusions Ltd. [2009] 319 ITR 306/185 Taxman 416 has held that the amendment to the first proviso and the omission of the second proviso to section 43B by the Finance Act, 2003 to be retrospective. It has been held by the hon'ble apex court in the case of CIT v. Vinay Cement Ltd. [2007] 313 ITR (St.) 1 (FRSC) that the amount of employees' provident fund deposited before the due d…

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

In the result, ITA Nos. 978/JP/2017, 979/JP/2017 & 1011/JP/2017

ITA 980/JPR/2017[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Feb 2018AY 2004-05
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Richa Khoda (CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…payment of ESI and PF before the due date of filing of return of income is an allowable deduction. On overall appreciation of the facts, I tend to agree with the appellant’s claim. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. Alom Extrusions Ltd. reported in 319 ITR 306 held that omission of second proviso to sec 43B and the amendment of first proviso by Finance Act, 2003, bringing about uniformity in payment of tax, duty, cess and fee on one hand and contribution to employees’ welfare funds on the other, are curative in nature, and thus, effective retrospectively w.e.f. 1-4-88 i.e. the date of insertion of firs…

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

In the result, ITA Nos. 978/JP/2017, 979/JP/2017 & 1011/JP/2017

ITA 979/JPR/2017[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Feb 2018AY 2003-04
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Richa Khoda (CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…payment of ESI and PF before the due date of filing of return of income is an allowable deduction. On overall appreciation of the facts, I tend to agree with the appellant’s claim. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. Alom Extrusions Ltd. reported in 319 ITR 306 held that omission of second proviso to sec 43B and the amendment of first proviso by Finance Act, 2003, bringing about uniformity in payment of tax, duty, cess and fee on one hand and contribution to employees’ welfare funds on the other, are curative in nature, and thus, effective retrospectively w.e.f. 1-4-88 i.e. the date of insertion of firs…

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

In the result, ITA Nos. 978/JP/2017, 979/JP/2017 & 1011/JP/2017

ITA 978/JPR/2017[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Feb 2018AY 2002-03
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Richa Khoda (CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…payment of ESI and PF before the due date of filing of return of income is an allowable deduction. On overall appreciation of the facts, I tend to agree with the appellant’s claim. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. Alom Extrusions Ltd. reported in 319 ITR 306 held that omission of second proviso to sec 43B and the amendment of first proviso by Finance Act, 2003, bringing about uniformity in payment of tax, duty, cess and fee on one hand and contribution to employees’ welfare funds on the other, are curative in nature, and thus, effective retrospectively w.e.f. 1-4-88 i.e. the date of insertion of firs…

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

In the result, ITA No. 975/JP/2017 is partly allowed for statistical

ITA 975/JPR/2017[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Feb 2018AY 2004-05
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Richa Khoda (CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 139(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 43B

…payment of ESI and PF before the due date of filing of return of income is an allowable deduction. On overall appreciation of the facts, I tend to agree with the appellant’s claim. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. Alom Extrusions Ltd. reported in 319 ITR 306 held that omission of second proviso to sec 43B and the amendment of first proviso by Finance Act, 2003, bringing about uniformity in payment of tax, duty, cess and fee on one hand and contribution to employees’ welfare funds on the other, are curative in nature, and thus, effective retrospectively w.e.f. 1-4-88 i.e. the date of insertion of firs…

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

In the result, ITA No. 975/JP/2017 is partly allowed for statistical

ITA 1012/JPR/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Feb 2018AY 2005-06
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Richa Khoda (CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 139(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 43B

…payment of ESI and PF before the due date of filing of return of income is an allowable deduction. On overall appreciation of the facts, I tend to agree with the appellant’s claim. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. Alom Extrusions Ltd. reported in 319 ITR 306 held that omission of second proviso to sec 43B and the amendment of first proviso by Finance Act, 2003, bringing about uniformity in payment of tax, duty, cess and fee on one hand and contribution to employees’ welfare funds on the other, are curative in nature, and thus, effective retrospectively w.e.f. 1-4-88 i.e. the date of insertion of firs…

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

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

ITA 974/JPR/2017[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Feb 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Hearing.” 2. The Only Common Issues Raised In These Two Appeals By The Revenue Is Regarding The Disallowance Made By The Ao In Respect Of Employee’S Contribution To Pf & Esi Beyond The Prescribed Time Limit

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri L.R. Meena (CIT)
Section 139(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…payment of ESI and PF before the due date of filing of return of income is an allowable deduction. On overall appreciation of the facts, I tend to agree with the appellant’s claim. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. Alom Extrusions Ltd. reported in 319 ITR 306 held that omission of second proviso to sec 43B and the amendment of first proviso by Finance Act, 2003, bringing about uniformity in payment of tax, duty, cess and fee on one hand and contribution to employees’ welfare funds on the other, are curative in nature, and thus, effective retrospectively w.e.f. 1-4-88 i.e. the date of insertion of firs…

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

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

ITA 973/JPR/2017[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Feb 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Hearing.” 2. The Only Common Issues Raised In These Two Appeals By The Revenue Is Regarding The Disallowance Made By The Ao In Respect Of Employee’S Contribution To Pf & Esi Beyond The Prescribed Time Limit

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri L.R. Meena (CIT)
Section 139(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…payment of ESI and PF before the due date of filing of return of income is an allowable deduction. On overall appreciation of the facts, I tend to agree with the appellant’s claim. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. Alom Extrusions Ltd. reported in 319 ITR 306 held that omission of second proviso to sec 43B and the amendment of first proviso by Finance Act, 2003, bringing about uniformity in payment of tax, duty, cess and fee on one hand and contribution to employees’ welfare funds on the other, are curative in nature, and thus, effective retrospectively w.e.f. 1-4-88 i.e. the date of insertion of firs…