CIT v. Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd.

Newage Fire Protection Industries Pvt .Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT (A) NFAC, Delhi

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalassessment Year: 2018-19

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/s. Newage Fire Commissioner of Income Protection Industries Pvt. Tax (Appeals), Ltd., National Faceless Appeal 4, Champaklal Udyog Vs. Centre (NFAC), Bhavan, Delhi Sion, Mumbai – 400 022 PAN: AADCN3668F (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Jeet Kamdar, A.R. Revenue by : Shri Chetan M. Kacha, D.R. Date of Hearing : 18 . 04 . 2023 Date of Pronouncement : 28 . 04 . 2023 O R D E R Per : Kuldip Singh, Judicial Member: The…

Usha Garments Mfg. Co. Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the Assesses is partly allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon'Bleusha Garments Manufacturing Co. V. Dcit, Cpc Private Limited Bangalore- 560500 Plot No 13, Wicel, Central Road Opposite Seepz, Midc Andheri (E) Mumbai- 400093 Pan: Aaacu1397H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : None Department Represented By : Vranda U Matkari

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER Usha Garments Manufacturing Co. v. DCIT, CPC Private Limited Bangalore- 560500 Plot No 13, Wicel, Central Road Opposite Seepz, MIDC Andheri (E) Mumbai- 400093 PAN: AAACU1397H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented by : None Department Represented by : Vranda U Matkari Date of Hearing : 10.04.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 27.04.2023 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (AM) 1. This appeal is filed by the assessee against order of Learned Commissi…

Macrotech Deveopers Limited (Sucessor to Shreeniwas Cotton Mills Limited, Mumbai vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Range-7(3), Mumbai

In the result appeal of the learned assessing officer and assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Kuldip Singh, Jm M/S. Macrotech Developers Limited (Successor Of Shreeniwas Cotton Dcit, Cc-7(3) Mills Ltd) 412, 4Th Floor, 17G, Vardhaman Room No. 655, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Chamber, Cawasji Patel Street, Fort Mumbai-400 001 (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Macrotech Developers Limited (Successor Of Shreeniwas Cotton Mills Ltd) Dcit, Cc-7(3) 412, 4Th Floor, 17G, Vardhaman Room No. 655, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Chamber, Cawasji Patel Street, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Fort Mumbai-400 001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacl1490J Assessee By : Shri Niraj Sheth Revenue By : Shri Asif Karmali

…th respect to the disallowance under section 36 (1) (va) of deposit of provident fund of employees contribution beyond the due dates described by the provident fund act, following the decision of the honourable High Court in case of Ghatge Patil transport Ltd 368 ITR 749, the addition was deleted. With respect to the allocation of cost of director's office, he held that issue is squarely covered by this decision in assessee's own case for assessment year 2016 – 17 in favour of the assessee and accordingly he deleted the disallowance. With respect to the disallowance under section 14 A of the act of ₹ 331,070/– un…

Smt Premsheela Devi Ranjeet Singh, Mumbai vs. Adic (CPC), Bangalore

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singh आअसं.2265/मुं/ 2021("न.व. 2019-20) Smt. Premsheela Devi Ranjeet Singh, 2Nd Floor, Gala No.202, Hasti Industrial Premises, Plot No.798, Midc Area, Midc, Navi Mumbai 400 710 Pan: Cznps-0590-R ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant

…3 (i) The amendment brought by Finance Act, 2021 by way of insertion of Explanation -5 to section 43B of the Act is prospective. (ii) The issue is covered by the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ghatge Patil Transport Ltd., 368 ITR 749 (Bom). 6. We have heard the submissions made by Ld. Departmental Representative and have examined the orders of authorities below. We find that it is an admitted position that the assessee had deposited PF and ESIC dues before filing return of income for the impugned assessment year, but after the due date under the respective Acts. The Hon’ble…

Lioyd Healthcare Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT (CPC) Bangalore, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri S Rifaur Rahman () Lloyd Healthcare Pvt Ltd Vs Dcit (Cpc), Bangalore Unit No.3A, Wing B, 2Nd Floor Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- Times Square, Marol 400 020 Andheri Kurla Road Andheri East, Mumbai-400 059 Pan : Aaccl1129L Appellant Respondent

…ombay High Court and Supreme Court etc. b) By overlooking the fact that even though the same is paid on or before due date of filing of return. c) By disregarding the judgement of Jurisdictional High Court of Bombay in the case of Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd. 368 ITR 749 and Hind Filter Ltd 90 taxmann.com 51 (Bombay) and Alom Extrusions Ltd. [2009] 319 ITR 306 (SC). d) By disregarding the fact that the judgement of Jurisdictional High Court is binding even in faceless appeal and assessment as per the order of Mahadev Cold Storage 127 taxmann.com 722 (Agra) in which it is held that, "Though Centralized NFAC has be…

Maruti Ramu Lande, Mumbai vs. The Astt. Director O Income Tax, CPC, Benluru, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Assesses is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blemaruti Ramu Lande V. The Asst. Director Of Income-Tax Cpc, Bangalore Flat No. 5L, 5Th Floor Karnataka - 560100 B. Wing, Siddhivinayak Towers Near Runwal Nagar Thane (W) – 400601 Pan: Adjpl1772E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Shreyas Shah & Shri Kunal Shah Department Represented By : Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai

…heckmate Services Private Limited vs. CIT in Civil Appeal No. 2833 of 2016 dated 12.10.2022” has decided this issue against the Assessee. At the same time, he relied on the Coordinate Bench decision in the case of CIT Central v. Ghatge Patil Transports [2014] 368 ITR 749 (Bombay) dated 14.10.2014. 4 Maruti Ramu Lande 8. The relevant observation and finding given by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Para No. 31-37 and Para No. 52-54 of the judgement are summarized as under: -  Section 43B falls in Part-V of the IT Act. What is apparent is that the scheme of the Act is such that sections 28 to 38 deal with different ki…

DCIT Cent. Cir -1, Thane vs. M/S. Antony Waste Handling Cell Ltd, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Gagan Goyal ()

…e company qua the employees contribution on account of PF and ESIC well before due date of filing the returns of income cannot be disallowed and relied upon the decision rendered by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs Ghatge Patil Transporters Ltd 368 ITR 749 (Bom) and various other judgements 5 ITAs 1942 & 1943/Mum/2022 & CO 43 & 33/Mum/2022 Antony Waste Handling Cell Ltd mentioned in the written submissions running from page 1 to 47 of the paper book. 7. However, on the other hand, the Ld.D.R. for the Revenue by relying upon the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A) contended that when the employees contr…

DCIT Cir 1, Thane vs. M/S. Antony Waste Handling Cell Ltd, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Gagan Goyal ()

…e company qua the employees contribution on account of PF and ESIC well before due date of filing the returns of income cannot be disallowed and relied upon the decision rendered by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs Ghatge Patil Transporters Ltd 368 ITR 749 (Bom) and various other judgements 5 ITAs 1942 & 1943/Mum/2022 & CO 43 & 33/Mum/2022 Antony Waste Handling Cell Ltd mentioned in the written submissions running from page 1 to 47 of the paper book. 7. However, on the other hand, the Ld.D.R. for the Revenue by relying upon the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A) contended that when the employees contr…

Blue Circle Organics Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Natinal E- Assessment Centre, Delhi, Mumbai

In the result, the present appeal by the Assessee is partly allowed

…f income for the year under consideration. (2) On the facts and circumstances and in law, the learned CIT (A) ought to have allowed in view of the judgment of the jurisdictional high court of Bombay in case of CIT Vs. Ghatge Patil Transport Ltd. [reported in 368 ITR 749] which held that employess‟s contribution to PF & ESI, if remitted within the due date prescribed u/s 139(1) of the Act for filing the income tax returns, would be allowed as deduction u/s 43B of the Act. (3) On the facts and circumstances, it is prayed that the claim of Your Appellant may be allowed.” The relevant facts, in brief, that assessm…

Mehk Chemicals Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore

In the result Ground no. 2 raised by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Gagan Goyalmehk Chemicals Private Ltd., Shed No. W6, Ttc Industrial Area, Behind Hico Products, Pawane, Thane (West)-400705. Pan: Aabcm0329E ...... Appellant Vs. Assistant Director Of Income Tax, Cpc, Post Bag No.2, Electronic City Post Office, Bangalore-560500 ..... Respondent Appellant By : Sh. Tanmay Phadke, Adv. Respondent By : Smt. Mahita Nair, Dr Date Of Hearing : 17/11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 26/12/2022

…cts and circumstances of the case Rs. 6,24,427/- and in law, the NFAC failed to appreciate that the disallowance Rs. 22, 44,527/- is governed by the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional Bombay High Court in "CIT vs. Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd (2014) 368 ITR 749 (Bombay) and Geekay Security Services (P.) Ltd. vs. DCIT (2019) 101 taxmann.com 192 (Bombay)". Thus, the disallowance of Rs. 22, 44,527/ may be deleted. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case Rs. 6,24,427/- and in law, the NFAC erred in holding that 3 ITA No. 2402/Mum/2022-Mehk Chemicals Private Ltd. the explanations 2 and 5 to Sections…

M/S. Almech Facades Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. NFAC`, Delhi

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Om Prakash Kantassessment Year: 2019-20 M/S. Almech Facades Pvt. National Faceless Appeal Ltd., Centre (Nfac), 113B, Hub Town Solaris Delhi Building, Vs. N.S. Phadke Marg, Andheri (East), Mumbai – 400 069 Pan: Aanca3788P (Appellant) (Respondent)

…ssessee company qua the employees contribution on account of PF & ESIC well before due date of filing the return of income cannot be disallowed and relied upon the decision rendered by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in case of CIT V. Ghatge Patil Transporters Ltd. 368 ITR 749 and various other judgments mentioned in the written submissions running from page 1 to 47 of the paper book. 7. However, on the other hand, the Ld. D.R. for the Revenue by relying upon the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) contended that when the employees contribution of PF & ESIC has not been deposited by the employer before due date prescribed…

M/S Veto Switchgears and Cables Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT, 13(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee filed by the assessee stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopalm/S Veto Switchgears Vs. Acit, 13(3)(2) & Cables Limited Room No. 229, 2 Nd Floor, 4Th Floor, Mumbai Aayakar Bhavan, Maharashtra Maharishi Karve Road, 400 058 Mumbai – 400 020 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaccv4990K Respondent .. Appellant

…’s account in the relevant fund or funds on or before the due date, the assessee is entitled to the deduction. In the statement of facts, the assessee referred the decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional Bombay High Court in the case of Ghadge Patil Transport Ltd. 368 ITR 749 (Bombay) wherein held that both employer and employees contribution are covered under the amendment to section 43B of the Act. We have also perused the other various pronouncements referred by the assessee wherein held that employees contribution to EPF and ESI are allowable if paid by the due date of filing return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act…