CIT v. Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd.

Gurera Synthetics P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 4(2)(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: G.S.Pannu, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Gurera Synthetics Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax Officer 4(2)(3) बिधम/ 33/37 Dwarkesh Market, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Dr. A.M. Road, Bhuleshwar, Mumbai 400020 Vs. Mumbai 400 002 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan No. Aaacg2269G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

…P a g e | 1 ITA No. 476/Mum/2015 AY: 2009-10 Gurera Synthetics Vs. ITO 4(2)(3) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE G.S.PANNU, AM AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM Gurera Synthetics Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax Officer 4(2)(3) बिधम/ 33/37 Dwarkesh Market, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Dr. A.M. Road, Bhuleshwar, Mumbai 400020 Vs. Mumbai 400 002 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ PAN No. AAACG2269G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant by : Shri Narayan Atal, A.R प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent by : Shri V. Vidyadhar, D.R सुनवाई की तायीख / : 13.10.2017 Date of Hearing घोषणा क…

Asst CIT 10(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Neo Sports Broadcast P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for assessment years 2007-08,

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2008-2009 Assessment Year: 2007-2008 Assessment Year: 2009-2010 & Assessment Year: 2010-2011 The Acit-10(3)(1), Vs. M/S Neo Sports Broadcast R. No. 212, Aayakar Bhavan, Pvt. Ltd., M.K. Road, Nimbus Centre, Mumbai - 400020 Oberoi Complex, Andheri (West), Mumbai – 400053 Pan: Aaccn2854Q

…6. On the other hand, the Ld. counsel for the assessee relying on the findings of the Ld. CIT (A) submitted that the findings of the Ld. CIT (A) is based on the law laid down by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ghatge Patil Transport Ltd. 368 ITR 749 (Bom). The Ld. counsel further submitted that since the findings of the Ld. CIT (A) is based on the law laid down by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court, there is no merit in this ground of appeal of the assessee and the same is liable to be dismissed. 7. We notice that in the present case, the appellant has made payment of employee’s contribution and…

Asst CIT 10(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Neo Sports Broadcast P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for assessment years 2007-08,

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2008-2009 Assessment Year: 2007-2008 Assessment Year: 2009-2010 & Assessment Year: 2010-2011 The Acit-10(3)(1), Vs. M/S Neo Sports Broadcast R. No. 212, Aayakar Bhavan, Pvt. Ltd., M.K. Road, Nimbus Centre, Mumbai - 400020 Oberoi Complex, Andheri (West), Mumbai – 400053 Pan: Aaccn2854Q

…6. On the other hand, the Ld. counsel for the assessee relying on the findings of the Ld. CIT (A) submitted that the findings of the Ld. CIT (A) is based on the law laid down by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ghatge Patil Transport Ltd. 368 ITR 749 (Bom). The Ld. counsel further submitted that since the findings of the Ld. CIT (A) is based on the law laid down by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court, there is no merit in this ground of appeal of the assessee and the same is liable to be dismissed. 7. We notice that in the present case, the appellant has made payment of employee’s contribution and…

Sahayog Microfinance Ltd vs. Asst CIT 8(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am)

…tribution. He submitted that the assessee has paid both amounts before the due date of filing the return of income and hence they are allowable as deduction as per the decision rendered by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd. (368 ITR 749). 5. I heard learned Departmental Representative and perused the record. I noticed that the details of payment of provident fund amount of ` 3,63,887/- is not available on record. Further assessee contends that the employees contribution was actually ` 1,88,193/- and remaining amount represents employers contribution. Since the facts are not cle…

ACIT 2(1), Mumbai vs. Cable Corporation of India Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed and Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

…It was claimed by the assessee before us that these are paid within due date of filing of return of income u/s 139 of the Act and this issue is covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ghatge Patil Transport Ltd. (2014) 368 ITR 749 (Bom), wherein it is held as under: - “13. In that judgment, this Court held that no substantial questions of law would arise since section 43B is inserted in the I.T. Act with effect from 1st April, 1984 by which the mercantile system of accounting with regard to tax, duty and contribution to welfare funds stood discontinued. Under section 43B…

ACIT 4(2), Mumbai vs. Mehta Equities Ltd ( Formerly Shree Securities Ltd), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Amarjit Singh (Jm)

…42,869/-. Learned AR submitted that the assessee has remitted the same before the due date of filing the return of income and hence the same is allowable as per the decision rendered by Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Ghatke Patil Transports (368 ITR 749)(Bom). 13. We have heard learned Departmental Representative on this issue. We prefer to set aside matter to the file of the Assessing Officer with the direction to examine the claim of the assessee and take appropriate decision by following decision rendered by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ghatke Patil Transport (supra). 14. Next i…

Cable Corporation of India Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed and Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

…It was claimed by the assessee before us that these are paid within due date of filing of return of income u/s 139 of the Act and this issue is covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ghatge Patil Transport Ltd. (2014) 368 ITR 749 (Bom), wherein it is held as under: - “13. In that judgment, this Court held that no substantial questions of law would arise since section 43B is inserted in the I.T. Act with effect from 1st April, 1984 by which the mercantile system of accounting with regard to tax, duty and contribution to welfare funds stood discontinued. Under section 43B…

Cable Corporation of India Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed and Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

…It was claimed by the assessee before us that these are paid within due date of filing of return of income u/s 139 of the Act and this issue is covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ghatge Patil Transport Ltd. (2014) 368 ITR 749 (Bom), wherein it is held as under: - “13. In that judgment, this Court held that no substantial questions of law would arise since section 43B is inserted in the I.T. Act with effect from 1st April, 1984 by which the mercantile system of accounting with regard to tax, duty and contribution to welfare funds stood discontinued. Under section 43B…

Cable Corporation of India Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 2(1)(4), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed and Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

…It was claimed by the assessee before us that these are paid within due date of filing of return of income u/s 139 of the Act and this issue is covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ghatge Patil Transport Ltd. (2014) 368 ITR 749 (Bom), wherein it is held as under: - “13. In that judgment, this Court held that no substantial questions of law would arise since section 43B is inserted in the I.T. Act with effect from 1st April, 1984 by which the mercantile system of accounting with regard to tax, duty and contribution to welfare funds stood discontinued. Under section 43B…

The Dy CIT Cir.1(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Aegis Logistics Ltd, Mumbai

Appeal stands allowed

Bench: S/Sh.Rajendra & C. N. Prasadआयकर अपील सं./Ita/7825/Mum/2004,िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:1999-2000 आयकर अपील सं./Ita/6905/Mum/2006 ,िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:1999-2000 Aegis Logistics Limited Acit, Circle-1(1) 403, Peninsula Chambers, Morarjee Mills Mumbai. Compound,G.K. Marg, Lower Parel(W) Vs. Mumbai-400 013. Pan:Aaaca 3302 N (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A./8372/Mum/2004 ,िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:1999-2000 Acit, Circle-1(1) Vs. Aegis Logistics Limited Mumbai. Mumbai-400013 (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By: Shri S.K. Mishra-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से /Assessee By: Shri Percy Pardiwala/Ms. Vasanti Patel सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 09/02/2017 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement:10/03/2017 लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य, राजे"" सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार/ Per Rajendra A.M.- अनुसार Challenging The Order Dated 16.6.2004 Of The Cit(A)-I,Mumbai The Assessee & The Assessing Officer(Ao)Have Filed Cross Appeals For The Year Under Consideration.The Assessee Has Also Filed Against The Penalty Imposed U/S.271(1)(C) For The Year Under Appeal.We Will Be Deciding All The Appeals By Single Common Order.Assessee-Company,Engaged In Business Of Manufacturing Of Chemicals,Filed Its Return Of Income,On 31.12.1999,Declaring Total Income Of Rs.5.97Crores.The Ao Completed Assessment U/S.143(3) Of The Act On 28.3.2002 Determin -Ing Its Income At Rs.13.93Crores. During The Course Of Hearing Before Us The Authorised Representative (Ar) Stated That The Assessee Was Not Interested In Pursuing Grounds No1.A, 1.C, 1.D & 1.E. Hence,Same Stand Dismissed, As Not Pressed.

…he held that contribution/payment to ESIC, were made after the due date, that there was no provision for grace period for making contribution to ESIC, he upheld the order of the AO. 3.2.Before us, the AR relied upon the cases of Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd. (368 ITR 749) and Hindustan Organics Chemicals Ltd.(366 ITR 1). The DR left issue to the discretion of the Bench. We find that assessee had made payment of provident fund within the grace period and payment on account of contribution to ESIC was made before the due date of filing of return of income.We find that in the above referred two judgments,the Hon'ble…

M/S. Aegis Logistics Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir. 1(1), Mumbai

Appeal stands allowed

Bench: S/Sh.Rajendra & C. N. Prasadआयकर अपील सं./Ita/7825/Mum/2004,िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:1999-2000 आयकर अपील सं./Ita/6905/Mum/2006 ,िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:1999-2000 Aegis Logistics Limited Acit, Circle-1(1) 403, Peninsula Chambers, Morarjee Mills Mumbai. Compound,G.K. Marg, Lower Parel(W) Vs. Mumbai-400 013. Pan:Aaaca 3302 N (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A./8372/Mum/2004 ,िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:1999-2000 Acit, Circle-1(1) Vs. Aegis Logistics Limited Mumbai. Mumbai-400013 (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By: Shri S.K. Mishra-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से /Assessee By: Shri Percy Pardiwala/Ms. Vasanti Patel सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 09/02/2017 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement:10/03/2017 लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य, राजे"" सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार/ Per Rajendra A.M.- अनुसार Challenging The Order Dated 16.6.2004 Of The Cit(A)-I,Mumbai The Assessee & The Assessing Officer(Ao)Have Filed Cross Appeals For The Year Under Consideration.The Assessee Has Also Filed Against The Penalty Imposed U/S.271(1)(C) For The Year Under Appeal.We Will Be Deciding All The Appeals By Single Common Order.Assessee-Company,Engaged In Business Of Manufacturing Of Chemicals,Filed Its Return Of Income,On 31.12.1999,Declaring Total Income Of Rs.5.97Crores.The Ao Completed Assessment U/S.143(3) Of The Act On 28.3.2002 Determin -Ing Its Income At Rs.13.93Crores. During The Course Of Hearing Before Us The Authorised Representative (Ar) Stated That The Assessee Was Not Interested In Pursuing Grounds No1.A, 1.C, 1.D & 1.E. Hence,Same Stand Dismissed, As Not Pressed.

…he held that contribution/payment to ESIC, were made after the due date, that there was no provision for grace period for making contribution to ESIC, he upheld the order of the AO. 3.2.Before us, the AR relied upon the cases of Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd. (368 ITR 749) and Hindustan Organics Chemicals Ltd.(366 ITR 1). The DR left issue to the discretion of the Bench. We find that assessee had made payment of provident fund within the grace period and payment on account of contribution to ESIC was made before the due date of filing of return of income.We find that in the above referred two judgments,the Hon'ble…

DCIT OSD 1(1), Mumbai vs. The Saraswat Co-Op Bank P.Ltd, Navi Mumbai

In the result all the six appeals i

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 8622/Mum/2010 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) The Deputy Commissioner Of The Saraswat Co-Operative बनाम/ Income Tax(Osd),1(1) Bank Limited V. Room No. 540/564, 5 T H Floor Madhushree, Plot No. 85 Aayakar Bhawan, M K Road District Navi Mumbai- New Marine Lines 400 703 Mumbai-400020 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaact5543L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

…e due date of filing of return of income as prescribed u/s. 139(1) of the Act, with the Revenue. The issue is no more res-integra and is squarely covered by the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Cit v. Ghatge Patil Transports Limited (2014) 368 ITR 749(Bom.) and decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Alom Extrusions Limited (2009) 319 ITR 306(SC) and hence the issue is decided in favour of the assessee and no disallowance u/s 43B of the Act r.w.s. 2(24)(x) and 36(1)(va) of the Act is warranted in the instant case in view of the afore-stated decisions, as the assessee in the ins…

DCIT (Ltu) -1, Mumbai vs. Lupin Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee and revenue are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Sanjay Garg (Jm)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” Bench, Mumbai Before Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Sanjay Garg (JM) I.T.A. No. 7513/Mum/2014 (Assessment Year 2008-09) DCIT (Large Taxpayer)-1 M/s. Lupin Limited Centre 1, 29th Floor Vs. 159, C.S.T. Road World Trade Centre Kalina, Santacruz Cuffe Parade East Mumbai-40 005. Mumbai-400 098. (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 7274/Mum/2014 (Assessment Year 2008-09) M/s. Lupin Limited DCIT (Large 159, C.S.T. Road Vs. Taxpayer)-1 Centre 1, 29th Floor Kalina, Santacruz East World Trade Centre Mumbai-400 098. Cuffe Parade Mumbai-40 005. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AA…

Loha Ispaat Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 6(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Ramit Kochar, Am

…espective Acts, but paid before the due date of filing of return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act, the same is allowable. This view of ours is supported by the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd. [(2014) 368 ITR 749 (Bom.)]. 7.2 Respectfully following the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court, we direct the A.O. to delete the disallowance and this issue of the assessee’s appeal is allowed. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. Order pronounced on this 05th day of October, 2016. आदेश क" घोषणा "दनांकः को क" गई । (Ramit Kochar)…

Forbes & Company Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 1(1), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for A

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosainm/S. Forbes & Company Ltd. Dcit, Circle 1(1) (Formerly Forbes Gokak Ltd.) Aayakar Bhavan Ground Floor, Forbes Bldg. Vs. M.K. Road Charanjit Rai Marg Mumbai 400020 Fort, Mumbai 400001 Pan - Aaacf1765A Appellant Respondent

…as submitted that the deduction of PF/ESIC is allowable as a deduction to the assessee in the light of, inter alia, the decisions of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the cases of: - (i) CIT vs. HOCL (366 ITR 1) (Bom) (ii) CIT vs. Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd. (368 ITR 749) (Bom) 8.2 The authorities below have not disputed the averments of the assessee that the PF/ESIC amounting to `6,852/- was paid to the government before the due date for filing the return of income under section 139(1) of the Act. The disallowance and consequent levy of penalty by authorities below was for the assessee’s making the said payment…

Silicon Interfaces P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 10(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

…आयकर आयकर अपीलीय आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, मुंबई अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई “ई” खंडपीठ मुंबई खंडपीठ खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“E”Bench Mumbai सव"ी सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" सव"ी राजे"" राजे"",लेखा राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं सद"य एवं एवं सी एवं सी सी. एन सी एन एन. "साद एन "साद "साद,"याियक "साद "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य सद"य Before S/Shri Rajendra,Accountant Member and C.N. Prasad,Judicial Member आयकर यकर यकर अपील यकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./ITA/8624/Mum/2011,िनधा"रण अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2008-09 वष" M/s. Silicon Interfaces Pvt.…

Voltas Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 7(3), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for A

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosainm/S. Voltas Limited Addl. Cit, Range 7(3) Voltas House - A Aayakar Bhavan Vs. Dr. Babasahed Ambedkar Road M.K. Road Chinchpokli, Mumbai 400033 Mumbai 400020 Pan - Aaacv2809D Appellant Respondent

…Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Alom Extrusions Ltd. (2009) 319 ITR 306 (SC) and the decisions of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Hindustan Organics Chemicals Ltd. (2014) 366 ITR 1 (Bom.) and CIT vs. Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd. (2014) 368 ITR 749 (Bom.). It is prayed that in view of the above, the disallowance of `46,519/- under section 43B of the Act be deleted. 5.2 Per contra, the learned D.R. supported the decision of the learned CIT(A) on this issue. 5.3.1 We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused and carefully considered the material on record. The issue bef…