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 367,154 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.

Binayak Hi-Tech Engineering (P) Ltd, Howrah vs. DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 524/KOL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap, Vp (Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey]

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…

Aradhana Distributors Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 522/KOL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap, Vp (Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey]

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…

Lanshee Products and Services Ltd, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 7(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 330/KOL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap, Vp (Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey]

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…

Lanshee Products and Services Ltd, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 7(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 329/KOL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap, Vp (Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey]

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…

Lanshee Products and Services Ltd, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 7(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 328/KOL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap, Vp (Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey]

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…

West Bengal Agro Industries Corporation Ltd, Bishnupur vs. ACIT, Cir. 6(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 480/KOL/2021[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata14 Dec 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz)

Section 139(1)Section 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. Shri Jayanta Khanra 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 6 A.Y. 2019-2020 West Bengal Agro Industries Corporation Ltd. 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’ contrib…

Durrung Tea Estate Ltd, Kolkata vs. CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 474/KOL/2021[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata14 Dec 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz)

Section 139(1)Section 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. Shri Jayanta Khanra 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 6 A.Y. 2018-2019 Durrung Tea Estate Ltd. 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 no…

Vidhi Clothing Company, Bengaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (CPC), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assesseeis allowed

ITA 369/BANG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Dec 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevanand Shri Chanda Poojariassessment Year :2018-19 M/S. Vidhi Clothing Company, Vs. Dcit, No.4, 2Nd Cross, Mysore Road, Central Processing Centre, Opp. Toll Gate, Vinayakanagar, Bengaluru. Bangalore – 560 026. Pan : Aahfv 9512 F Assessee By : Smt. Suman Lunkar, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Sankar Ganesh K, Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 14.12.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.12.2021 O R D E R Per N. V. Vasudevan

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Sankar Ganesh K, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…istinction has been accepted viz., CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corpn. [2014] 41 taxmann.com 100/ 366 ITR 170/223 Taxman 398 (Guj.), Popular Vehicles & Services Pvt Ltd v. CIT [2018] 96 taxmann.com 13/257 Taxman 120/406 ITR (Ker), CIT Vs. Bharat Hotels 410 ITR 417 (Delhi). 6. The CIT(A), thereafter held that the amendment to section 36(1)(va) by insertion of explanation 2and the amendment to section 43B by insertion to explanation 5 by the Finance Bill 2021 was only declaratory / clarificatory in nature and there therefore was applicable with retrospective effect by necessary intendment of deeming nature…

Charchco Electronics (India) (P) Ltd, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 8(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 457/KOL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Dec 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz)

Section 139(1)Section 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. Shri Jayanta Khanra 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 6 A.Y. 2018-2019 Charchco Electronics (India) (P) Limited 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’ contributio…

Powertronix Engineering Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, CPC, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 554/KOL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Dec 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz) & Shri A.T. Varkey

Section 139(1)Section 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. Shri Jayanta Khanra 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…

M/S Balaji Export Corporation, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 29, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 530/KOL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Dec 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap(Kz) &Shri A. T. Varkey] Assessment Year: 2019-20

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

…1 A.Y 2019-20 Balaji Export Corporation आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ –“C” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C”BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice President (KZ) &Shri A. T. Varkey, Judicial Member] Assessment Year: 2019-20 Balaji Export Corporation Vs. DCIT, Cir-29, Kolkata PAN: AADFB1401H Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing (Virtual) 02-12-2021 Date of Pronouncement 10-12-2021 For the Appellant Shri Sunil Surana, FCA, Ld.AR For the Respondent Shri Partha Pratim Barman, Add. CIT, ld. DR ORDER Per Bench This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner o…

Plasto Electronics Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 523/KOL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Dec 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap(Kz) &Shri A. T. Varkey] Assessment Year: 2018-19

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

…1 A.Y 2018-19 M/s. Plasto Electronics P.Ltd आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ –“A” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A”BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice President (KZ) &Shri A. T. Varkey, Judicial Member] Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/s. Plasto Electronics P.Ltd Vs. DCIT, ( CPC), Bangalore PAN: AADCP1019J Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing (Virtual) 02-12-2021 Date of Pronouncement 10-12-2021 For the Appellant Shri Avijit Dey, Advocate, ld.AR For the Respondent Shri Partha Pratim Barman, Add. CIT, Ld. DR ORDER Per Bench This is an appealpreferred by the assessee against the order of the Com…

Tapan Paul, Kolkata vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 509/KOL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Dec 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap(Kz) &Shri A. T. Varkey] Assessment Year: 2018-19

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

…1 A.Y 2018-19 Tapan Paul आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ –“C(SMC)” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C(SMC)”BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice President (KZ) &Shri A. T. Varkey, Judicial Member] Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/s. Tapan Paul Vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore PAN: AWQPP7491L Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing (Virtual) 02-12-2021 Date of Pronouncement 10 -12-2021 For the Appellant ShriAvijitDey, Advocate, ld.AR For the Respondent ShriParthaPratim Barman, Add. CIT, ld. DR ORDER Per Bench This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (App…

Manjushree Plantations Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. -1, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 503/KOL/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Dec 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz) & Shri A.T. Varkey

Section 139(1)Section 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. Shri Jayanta Khanra 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…

Neo Gallant Security Services Pvt. Ltd, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 12(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 463/KOL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Dec 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap(Kz) &Shri A. T. Varkey]

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

…1 ITA Nos.461 to 463/Kol/2021 A.Ys 2017-18, ’18-19 & ’19-20 M/s.Neo Gallant Security Service P.Ltd आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ –“B(SMC)” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B(SMC)”BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice President (KZ) &Shri A. T. Varkey, Judicial Member] ITA Nos. 461 to 463/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19& 2019-20 M/s. Neo Gallant Security Service Vs. ITO, Ward -12(1), Kolkata P.Ltd. PAN: [AACCN5377N] Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing (Virtual) 02-12-2021 Date of Pronouncement 10 -12-2021 For the Appellant Shri Akkal Dudhewala, FCA, ld.AR For the Respondent Shr…

Neo Gallant Security Services Pvt. Ltd, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 12(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 462/KOL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Dec 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap(Kz) &Shri A. T. Varkey]

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

…1 ITA Nos.461 to 463/Kol/2021 A.Ys 2017-18, ’18-19 & ’19-20 M/s.Neo Gallant Security Service P.Ltd आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ –“B(SMC)” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B(SMC)”BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice President (KZ) &Shri A. T. Varkey, Judicial Member] ITA Nos. 461 to 463/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19& 2019-20 M/s. Neo Gallant Security Service Vs. ITO, Ward -12(1), Kolkata P.Ltd. PAN: [AACCN5377N] Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing (Virtual) 02-12-2021 Date of Pronouncement 10 -12-2021 For the Appellant Shri Akkal Dudhewala, FCA, ld.AR For the Respondent Shr…

Neo Gallant Security Services Pvt. Ltd, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 12(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 461/KOL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Dec 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap(Kz) &Shri A. T. Varkey]

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

…1 ITA Nos.461 to 463/Kol/2021 A.Ys 2017-18, ’18-19 & ’19-20 M/s.Neo Gallant Security Service P.Ltd आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ –“B(SMC)” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B(SMC)”BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice President (KZ) &Shri A. T. Varkey, Judicial Member] ITA Nos. 461 to 463/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19& 2019-20 M/s. Neo Gallant Security Service Vs. ITO, Ward -12(1), Kolkata P.Ltd. PAN: [AACCN5377N] Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing (Virtual) 02-12-2021 Date of Pronouncement 10 -12-2021 For the Appellant Shri Akkal Dudhewala, FCA, ld.AR For the Respondent Shr…

East India Security Service, Kolkata vs. CPC, Banglore

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 455/KOL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Dec 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap(Kz) &Shri A. T. Varkey]

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

…1 ITA Nos.454& 455/Kol/2021 A.Ys 2018-19 & 2019-20 M/s. East India Security Service आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ –“C(SMC)”” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C(SMC)”BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice President (KZ) &Shri A. T. Varkey, Judicial Member] ITA No. 454&455/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2018-19&2019-20 M/s. East India Security Service Vs. AO, CPC, Bangalore PAN: AAAFE8298G Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing (Virtual) 02-12-2021 Date of Pronouncement 10-12-2021 For the Appellant ShriSushil Pranshukha, ld.AR For the Respondent Shri Partha Pratim Barman, Add. CIT, ld. DR ORDER P…

East India Security Service Service, Kolkata vs. CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 454/KOL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Dec 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap(Kz) &Shri A. T. Varkey]

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

…1 ITA Nos.454& 455/Kol/2021 A.Ys 2018-19 & 2019-20 M/s. East India Security Service आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ –“C(SMC)”” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C(SMC)”BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice President (KZ) &Shri A. T. Varkey, Judicial Member] ITA No. 454&455/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2018-19&2019-20 M/s. East India Security Service Vs. AO, CPC, Bangalore PAN: AAAFE8298G Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing (Virtual) 02-12-2021 Date of Pronouncement 10-12-2021 For the Appellant ShriSushil Pranshukha, ld.AR For the Respondent Shri Partha Pratim Barman, Add. CIT, ld. DR ORDER P…

Machine Tools India Ltd, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir. 2(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 407/KOL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Dec 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap(Kz) &Shri A. T. Varkey]

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

…1 ITA Nos.405, 406 & 407/Kol/2021 A.Ys 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20 M/s. Machine Tools India Ltd. आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ –“B” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B”BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice President (KZ) &Shri A. T. Varkey, Judicial Member] ITA Nos. 405 to 407/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19& 2019-20 M/s. Machine Tools India Ltd Vs. ACIT,Cir-2(1), Kolkata PAN: AABCM9740R Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing (Virtual) 02-12-2021 Date of Pronouncement 10 -12-2021 For the Appellant Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate, ld.AR For the Respondent Shri Partha Pratim Barman, Add.…