CIT v. Bharat Hotels Ltd.

410 ITR 417High Court2019#146 most cited

What is CIT v. Bharat Hotels Ltd. authority for?

Employee contributions to provident fund and ESI, if paid beyond the due date prescribed by the respective welfare fund statutes, are not allowed as a deduction under the Income Tax Act.

486

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,164 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Bharat Hotels Ltd. · section 36(1)(va) · section 43B · employee contribution deduction · provident fund ESI late payment · due date of fund · disallowance of employee contributions · section 2(24)(x)

Also reported as

103 Taxmann.com 295

Sections most often in play

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)(ii)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 43b(b)section 36(1)(va)section 2(24)(x)section 43bsection 2(24)section 36(1)section 43section 36section 28section 139(1)section 139section 143(1)

Judgments citing CIT v. Bharat Hotels Ltd.

Gangotri Health Care & Research Pvt. Ltd., Darjeeling vs. CPC, Bagalore(ACIT, Cir. 1, Siliguri), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 580/KOL/2021[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata16 Feb 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey & Shri Rajesh Kumar] I.T.A. No. 580/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2019-20 Gangotri Health Care & Research Vs. Cpc, Bangalore [Acit, Cir-1, Pvt. Ltd. Siliguri] (Pan: Aafcg7852G) Appellant Respondent

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

…of the lower authorities and uphold the claim of deduction on this issue. 14. Per contra, the Ld. D.R. ShriJayantaKhanra supporting the decision of authorities below has contended that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bharat Hotel Ltd. in 410 ITR 417 7 I.T.A. No. 580/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2019-20 Gangotri Health Care & Research Pvt. Ltd. has decided this issue in favour of the revenue and the Delhi Tribunal has followed the order of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Bharat Hotel (supra) and upheld the action of the Department disallowing the amount deposited by the assessee company in res…

Shri Tarit Kumar Ghosh, Kolkata vs. A.O. CPC, Bangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 500/KOL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Feb 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey] I.T.A. No. 499 & 500/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 Shri Tarit Kumar Ghosh Vs. Dcit, Cpc, Bengaluru (Pan: Adhpg7436L) Appellant Respondent

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

…of the lower authorities and uphold the claim of deduction on this issue. 14. Per contra, the Ld. D.R. ShriJayantaKhanra supporting the decision of authorities below has contended that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bharat Hotel Ltd. in 410 ITR 417 has decided this issue in favour of the revenue and the Delhi Tribunal has followed the order of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Bharat Hotel (supra) and upheld the action of the Department 7 I.T.A. No. 499 & 500/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 Shri Tarit Kumar Ghosh disallowing the amount deposited by the assessee company in respe…

Shri Tarit Kumar Ghosh, Kolkata vs. A.O. CPC, Bangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 499/KOL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Feb 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey] I.T.A. No. 499 & 500/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 Shri Tarit Kumar Ghosh Vs. Dcit, Cpc, Bengaluru (Pan: Adhpg7436L) Appellant Respondent

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

…of the lower authorities and uphold the claim of deduction on this issue. 14. Per contra, the Ld. D.R. ShriJayantaKhanra supporting the decision of authorities below has contended that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bharat Hotel Ltd. in 410 ITR 417 has decided this issue in favour of the revenue and the Delhi Tribunal has followed the order of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Bharat Hotel (supra) and upheld the action of the Department 7 I.T.A. No. 499 & 500/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 Shri Tarit Kumar Ghosh disallowing the amount deposited by the assessee company in respe…

Orange Securitas Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. A.O. Cir. 6(2), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 490/KOL/2021[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata16 Feb 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey & Shri Rajesh Kumar] I.T.A. No. 490/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2017-18 Orange Securities Pvt. Ltd. Vs. A.O., Circle-6(2), Kolkata (Pan: Aaaco 8239 L) Appellant Respondent

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

…of the lower authorities and uphold the claim of deduction on this issue. 14. Per contra, the Ld. D.R. ShriJayantaKhanra supporting the decision of authorities below has contended that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bharat Hotel Ltd. in 410 ITR 417 7 I.T.A. No. 490/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2017-18 Orange Securities Pvt. Ltd. has decided this issue in favour of the revenue and the Delhi Tribunal has followed the order of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Bharat Hotel (supra) and upheld the action of the Department disallowing the amount deposited by the assessee company in respect of the em…

Premier Irrigation Adritee Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir. 11(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 481/KOL/2021[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata16 Feb 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey & Shri Rajesh Kumar] I.T.A. No. 481/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2019-20 Premier Irrigation Adritec Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Acit, Circle-11(1), Kolkata (Pan: Aafcm 4800 Q) Appellant Respondent

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

…of the lower authorities and uphold the claim of deduction on this issue. 14. Per contra, the Ld. D.R. ShriJayantaKhanra supporting the decision of authorities below has contended that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bharat Hotel Ltd. in 410 ITR 417 7 I.T.A. No. 481/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2019-20 Premier Irrigation Adritec Pvt. Ltd. has decided this issue in favour of the revenue and the Delhi Tribunal has followed the order of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Bharat Hotel (supra) and upheld the action of the Department disallowing the amount deposited by the assessee company in respect…

Diamond Engineering, Kolkata vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 473/KOL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Feb 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey] I.T.A. No. 472 & 473/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 Diamond Engineering Vs. Dcit, Cpc, Bengaluru (Pan:Aacfd5820F) Appellant Respondent

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

…of the lower authorities and uphold the claim of deduction on this issue. 14. Per contra, the Ld. D.R. ShriJayantaKhanra supporting the decision of authorities below has contended that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bharat Hotel Ltd. in 410 ITR 417 has decided this issue in favour of the revenue and the Delhi Tribunal has followed the order of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Bharat Hotel (supra) and upheld the action of the Department 7 I.T.A. No. 473/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2019-20 Diamond Engineering disallowing the amount deposited by the assessee company in respect of the employees’…

Diamond Engineering, Kolkata vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 472/KOL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Feb 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey] I.T.A. No. 472 & 473/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 Diamond Engineering Vs. Dcit, Cpc, Bengaluru (Pan:Aacfd5820F) Appellant Respondent

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

…of the lower authorities and uphold the claim of deduction on this issue. 14. Per contra, the Ld. D.R. ShriJayantaKhanra supporting the decision of authorities below has contended that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bharat Hotel Ltd. in 410 ITR 417 has decided this issue in favour of the revenue and the Delhi Tribunal has followed the order of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Bharat Hotel (supra) and upheld the action of the Department 7 I.T.A. No. 473/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2019-20 Diamond Engineering disallowing the amount deposited by the assessee company in respect of the employees’…

Hind Electric & Trading Co., Kolkata vs. CPC/ITO, WD-40(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 464/KOL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Feb 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey] I.T.A. No. 464/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2019-20

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

…of the lower authorities and uphold the claim of deduction on this issue. 14. Per contra, the Ld. D.R. ShriJayantaKhanra supporting the decision of authorities below has contended that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bharat Hotel Ltd. in 410 ITR 417 7 I.T.A. No. 464/Kol/2021 Hind Electric & Trading Co., Assessment Year: 2019-20 has decided this issue in favour of the revenue and the Delhi Tribunal has followed the order of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Bharat Hotel (supra) and upheld the action of the Department disallowing the amount deposited by the assessee company in respect of the e…

Arun Kumar Biswas, Bishnupur vs. ITO, Ward-26(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 408/KOL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Feb 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey] I.T.A. Nos. 370 & 408/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2018-19

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

…of the lower authorities and uphold the claim of deduction on this issue. 14. Per contra, the Ld. D.R. ShriJayantaKhanra supporting the decision of authorities below has contended that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bharat Hotel Ltd. in 410 ITR 417 7 I.T.A. Nos. 370 & 408/Kol/2021 Arun Kumar Bisawas., AYs:2018-19 has decided this issue in favour of the revenue and the Delhi Tribunal has followed the order of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Bharat Hotel (supra) and upheld the action of the Department disallowing the amount deposited by the assessee company in respect of the employees’ cont…

M/S Jayanta Food Products, Kolkata vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 384/KOL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Feb 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey] I.T.A. Nos. 383 & 384/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20

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

…of the lower authorities and uphold the claim of deduction on this issue. 14. Per contra, the Ld. D.R. ShriJayantaKhanra supporting the decision of authorities below has contended that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bharat Hotel Ltd. in 410 ITR 417 7 I.T.A. Nos. 383-384/Kol/2021 Jayanta Food Products, Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 has decided this issue in favour of the revenue and the Delhi Tribunal has followed the order of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Bharat Hotel (supra) and upheld the action of the Department disallowing the amount deposited by the assessee company in respec…

M/S Jayanta Food Products, Kolkata vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 383/KOL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Feb 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey] I.T.A. Nos. 383 & 384/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20

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

…of the lower authorities and uphold the claim of deduction on this issue. 14. Per contra, the Ld. D.R. ShriJayantaKhanra supporting the decision of authorities below has contended that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bharat Hotel Ltd. in 410 ITR 417 7 I.T.A. Nos. 383-384/Kol/2021 Jayanta Food Products, Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 has decided this issue in favour of the revenue and the Delhi Tribunal has followed the order of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Bharat Hotel (supra) and upheld the action of the Department disallowing the amount deposited by the assessee company in respec…

Arun Kumar Biswas, Bishnupur vs. ITO, Ward-26(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 370/KOL/2021[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata16 Feb 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey] I.T.A. Nos. 370 & 408/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2018-19

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

…of the lower authorities and uphold the claim of deduction on this issue. 14. Per contra, the Ld. D.R. ShriJayantaKhanra supporting the decision of authorities below has contended that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bharat Hotel Ltd. in 410 ITR 417 7 I.T.A. Nos. 370 & 408/Kol/2021 Arun Kumar Bisawas., AYs:2018-19 has decided this issue in favour of the revenue and the Delhi Tribunal has followed the order of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Bharat Hotel (supra) and upheld the action of the Department disallowing the amount deposited by the assessee company in respect of the employees’ cont…

Shyamal Banerjee, Purulia vs. CPC, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 502/KOL/2021[502]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Feb 2022

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey] I.T.A. No. 502/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2018-19 Shyamal Banerjee Vs. Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi (Pan:Adupb0408N) Appellant Respondent

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

…of the lower authorities and uphold the claim of deduction on this issue. 14. Per contra, the Ld. D.R. ShriJayantaKhanra supporting the decision of authorities below has contended that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bharat Hotel Ltd. in 410 ITR 417 has decided this issue in favour of the revenue and the Delhi Tribunal has followed the order of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Bharat Hotel (supra) and upheld the action of the Department 7 I.T.A. No. 502/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2018-19 Shyamal Banerjee disallowing the amount deposited by the assessee company in respect of the employees’ c…

Cogwheel Facility Management Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT CPC, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1838/DEL/2020[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Feb 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2018-19 Cogwheel Facility Management Pvt. Vs Dcit, Ltd., J-128/1, 2Nd Floor, Cpc, Mohammadpur Village, Bangalore. Near Bhikaji Cama Place, Rk Puram, New Delhi. Pan: Aagcc1517K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ruchesh Sinha, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 03.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : .02.2022 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 27Th August, 2020 Of The Cit(A)-2, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under:- “1. That The Ld.Cit(A) Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Upholding The Order Of The Ao, Passed Under Section 154 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Upholding The Addition Of Rs.23,55,432/- Made By Ao By Invoking The Provisions Of Section 36(1)(Va) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 3. That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Ignoring The Well- Established Judicial Pronouncements Including That Of The Jurisdictional High Court. 4. That The Impugned Appellate Order Is Arbitrary, Illegal, Bad In Law & The Violation Of Rudimentary Principle Of Contemporary Jurisprudence. 5. That The Appellant Craves Leave To Add, Amend, Alter, Vary And/Or Withdraw Any Or All The Above Grounds Of Appeal Before Or At The Time Of Hearing Of The Appeal.”

For Appellant: Shri Ruchesh Sinha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…h a delay of just 1 day. There is no provision in the Act under which this amount can be allowed as deduction in any year thereafter. 4.1.2 The judicial decision:- In this context, the Jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in CIT vs. Bharat Hotels Limited (2019) 410 ITR 417 (Del.) had an occasion to examine the matter. The Hon’ble Court has made the following observations:- 3 “Having regard to the specific provisions of the Employees’ Provident Funds Act and ESI Act as well as the concerned notifications which granted a grace period of 5 days, we are of the opinion that the ITAT’s decision in this case was not corr…

Kanishka Basu Mallik, Kolkata vs. Asstt. Director of Income Tax, CPC, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 27/KOL/2022[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata11 Feb 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey & Shri Rajesh Kumar] I.T.A. No. 27/Kol/2022 Assessment Years: 2019-20 Kanishka Basu Mallik Vs. Adit, Cpc, Bengaluru (Pan: Bwapm2770E) Appellant Respondent

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

…of the lower authorities and uphold the claim of deduction on this issue. 14. Per contra, the Ld. D.R. ShriJayantaKhanra supporting the decision of authorities below has contended that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bharat Hotel Ltd. in 410 ITR 417 has decided this issue in favour of the revenue and the Delhi Tribunal has followed the order of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Bharat Hotel (supra) and upheld the action of the Department disallowing the amount deposited by the assessee company in respect of the employees’ contribution since it was not deposited within the due date as prescribe…

Genesis Intellectuals Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. Asst. Director of Income Tax, CPC, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 26/KOL/2022[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata11 Feb 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey & Shri Rajesh Kumar] I.T.A. No. 26/Kol/2022 Assessment Years: 2019-20 Genesis Intellectuals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Adit, Cpc (Pan: Aagcg2638H) Appellant Respondent

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

…of the lower authorities and uphold the claim of deduction on this issue. 14. Per contra, the Ld. D.R. ShriJayantaKhanra supporting the decision of authorities below has contended that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bharat Hotel Ltd. in 410 ITR 417 7 I.T.A. No. 26/Kol/2022 Assessment Years: 2019-20 Genesis Intellectuals Pvt. Ltd. has decided this issue in favour of the revenue and the Delhi Tribunal has followed the order of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Bharat Hotel (supra) and upheld the action of the Department disallowing the amount deposited by the assessee company in respect of the…

Maithan Alloys Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 560/KOL/2021[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata11 Feb 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

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

…of the lower authorities and uphold the claim of deduction on this issue. 14. Per contra, the Ld. D.R. ShriJayantaKhanra supporting the decision of authorities below has contended that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bharat Hotel Ltd. in 410 ITR 417 7 I.T.A. Nos. 559 & 560/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2019-20 Maithan Alloys Ltd. has decided this issue in favour of the revenue and the Delhi Tribunal has followed the order of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Bharat Hotel (supra) and upheld the action of the Department disallowing the amount deposited by the assessee company in respect…

Maithan Alloys Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 559/KOL/2021[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata11 Feb 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

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

…of the lower authorities and uphold the claim of deduction on this issue. 14. Per contra, the Ld. D.R. ShriJayantaKhanra supporting the decision of authorities below has contended that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bharat Hotel Ltd. in 410 ITR 417 7 I.T.A. Nos. 559 & 560/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2019-20 Maithan Alloys Ltd. has decided this issue in favour of the revenue and the Delhi Tribunal has followed the order of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Bharat Hotel (supra) and upheld the action of the Department disallowing the amount deposited by the assessee company in respect…

Radford Global Limited, Mumbai vs. ADIT, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 709/DEL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Feb 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2019-20] Radford Global Ltd., Vs Adit, Office No.704, Wellington Business Cpc, Park 1, Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri Bangalore. East, Mumbai, Maharashtra-400059. Pan-Aabcm5771E Appellant Respondent Appellant By None Respondent By Sh. Om Prakash, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 06.01.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 10.02.2022

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

…ntra, Ld. Sr. DR vehemently opposed these submissions and submitted that law is clear in this respect and he relied upon the decision of Ld.CIT(A). He further relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Bharat Hotels Ltd. [2019] 103 Taxmann.com 295 (Delhi) wherein the Hon’ble High Court has decided the issue in favour of the Revenue by observing as under:- “Having regard to the specific provisions of the Employees‟ 8. Provident Funds Act and ESI Act as well as the concerned notifications which granted a grace period of 5 days (which appears to have been late withdrawn recently on…

Darks Security Consultant Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 12(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 14/KOL/2022[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata09 Feb 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey & Shri Rajesh Kumar] I.T.A. No. 14/Kol/2022 Assessment Years: 2015-16 Darks Security Consultant Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Circle-12(1), Kolkata (Pan: Aabcd 5445 J) Appellant Respondent

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

…of the lower authorities and uphold the claim of deduction on this issue. 14. Per contra, the Ld. D.R. ShriJayantaKhanra supporting the decision of authorities below has contended that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bharat Hotel Ltd. in 410 ITR 417 7 I.T.A. No. 14/Kol/2022 Assessment Years: 2015-16 Darks Security Consultant Pvt. Ltd. has decided this issue in favour of the revenue and the Delhi Tribunal has followed the order of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Bharat Hotel (supra) and upheld the action of the Department disallowing the amount deposited by the assessee company in respect of…