CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation

366 ITR 170High Court2014#38 most cited

What is CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation authority for?

Employees' contributions to welfare funds, such as provident fund, are not allowable as a deduction under section 36(1)(va) if deposited beyond the due date prescribed under the respective welfare statutes, even by a single day. Such delayed deposits are not cured even if made before the income-tax return filing due date.

1,158

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation · 366 ITR 170 · Section 36(1)(va) · Section 2(24)(x) · employees contribution to provident fund · delayed deposit of PF · disallowance of employee contribution · due date for deposit · welfare fund contributions · EPF Act due date · Checkmate Services

Sections most often in play

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 1961Section 40A(7)Section 43B

Issues it is cited on

employees contribution to pfsection 2(24)(x)section 36(1)(va)section 2(24)section 43bsection 43section 36section 36(1)section 139(1)section 139section 143(1)section 13

Judgments citing CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation

M/S. M M Vora Automobiles Pvt. Ltd., Vadodara vs. The DCIT, CPC, Banglore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 100/AHD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Jun 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Hearing Of The Appeal.”

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr. D.R
Section 139Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 44A

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH Before: Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member And Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal, Judicial Member Assessment Year 2017-18 M/s. M M Vora The DCIT, Automobiles Pvt. Ltd., CPC, Bangalore Opp. Octroi Naka Dabhoi Vs (Respondent) Road, Pratap Nagar, Vadodara PAN: AABCM5919N (Appellant) Assessee by: None Revenue by: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing : 03-06-2022 Date of pronouncement : 08-06-2022 आदेश/ORDER PER : SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal…

Thiruvalaya Venugopal, Bangalore vs. Assistant Director Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 235/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jun 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Smt.Mrinalini, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sr.Narayana K.R., Addl.CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…s made prior to the due date of filing of return of income u/s 139(1) of the I.T.Act. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court differed with the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation reported in 366 ITR 170 (Guj.). The Hon'ble High Court was considering following substantial question of law:- "Whether in law, the Tribunal was justified in affirming the finding of Assessing Officer in denying the appellant's claim of deductions of the employees contribution to PF/ESI alleging that the payment was not made by the appellant in accordance with the provi…

United Coffee House, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-52(4), Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 792/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Delhi08 Jun 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2019-20 M/S. United Coffee House, Vs. Income Tax Officer, E-15, Connaught Place, Ward-52(4), Delhi Delhi Pan :Aaafu1260G (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…vered under the amendment to Section 43B of I.T. Act – the Tribunal was right in holding that payments are subject to benefits of Section 43B. 8. We have examined the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of State Road Transport Corporation (366 ITR 170) wherein the court has held the the payment were not allowable u/s 36(1)(va).It was held as under: “Section 43B, read with section 36(1)(va) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 Business disallowance - Certain deductions to be allowed on actual payment (employee's contribution) - whether where an employer has not credited sum received by it as employee's…

M/S. Avadh Hospital and Heart Centre, Lucknow vs. DCIT-6, Lucknow-New, Lucknow

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

ITA 105/LKW/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow07 Jun 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

For Appellant: Shri A. P. Sinha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Sachan, D.R
Section 36(1)(v)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “A”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI. A. D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI T. S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.104 & 105/LKW/2022 Assessment Years: 2019-20 & 2018-19 M/s Avadh Hospital and v. The DCIT-6 Heart Centre Lucknow 9-D, Kanpur Road Singar Nagar, Alambagh Lucknow TAN/PAN: (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri A. P. Sinha, Advocate Respondent by: Shri Pankaj Sachan, D.R. Date of hearing: 31 05 2022 Date of pronouncement: 07 06 2022 O R D E R PER A.D. JAIN, V.P.: These are assessee’s appeals against the respective orders of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC, New Delhi, bo…

M/S Avadh Hospital and Heart Centre, Lucknow vs. DCIT-6, Lucknow-New

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

ITA 104/LKW/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow07 Jun 2022AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

For Appellant: Shri A. P. Sinha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Sachan, D.R
Section 36(1)(v)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “A”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI. A. D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI T. S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.104 & 105/LKW/2022 Assessment Years: 2019-20 & 2018-19 M/s Avadh Hospital and v. The DCIT-6 Heart Centre Lucknow 9-D, Kanpur Road Singar Nagar, Alambagh Lucknow TAN/PAN: (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri A. P. Sinha, Advocate Respondent by: Shri Pankaj Sachan, D.R. Date of hearing: 31 05 2022 Date of pronouncement: 07 06 2022 O R D E R PER A.D. JAIN, V.P.: These are assessee’s appeals against the respective orders of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC, New Delhi, bo…

M/S Urban Coop Bank Ltd, Bareilly vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Bareilly New

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 133/LKW/2021[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow07 Jun 2022AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri A.D Jain & Shri T.S. Kapoor

Section 139(1)Section 36Section 43B

…I.T.A. No.133/Lkw/2021 Assessment year: 2018-19 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “A”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI A.D JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI T.S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.133/Lkw/2021 Assessment year:2018-19 M/s Urban Coop. Bank Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax, R/o Block a Head Office, CPC, Bangalore, Deendayal Puram, Pilibhit Road, [Jurisdictional Asstt. Bareilly Commissioner of Income-tax-1, PAN:AAAJU 0088Q Bareilly-New] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Ms. Shweta Mittal, C.A. Respondent by Shri Pankaj Sachan, D.R. Date of hearing 01/06/2022 Date of pronouncement 07…

Rashi Eco Tourism Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed in favour of the assessee

ITA 50/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Jun 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Chalapathy, CAFor Respondent: Shri M.S. Nethrapal, Addl. DIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…made prior to the due date of filing of return of income u/s 139(1) of the I.T. Act. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court differed with the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation reported in 366 ITR 170 (Guj.). The Hon'ble High Court was considering following substantial question of law:- "Whether in law, the Tribunal was justified in affirming the finding of Assessing Officer in denying the appellant's claim of deductions of the employees contribution to PF/ESI alleging that the payment was not made by the appellant in accordance with the provi…

M/S. International Aerospace Manufacturing Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 618/BANG/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Jun 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Shreeshkumar Hegde, CAFor Respondent: Shri M S Nethrapal, Addl. DIT
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…made prior to the due date of filing of return of income u/s 139(1) of the I.T. Act. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court differed with the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation reported in 366 ITR 170 (Guj.). The Hon'ble High Court was considering following substantial question of law:- "Whether in law, the Tribunal was justified in affirming the finding of Assessing Officer in denying the appellant's claim of deductions of the employees contribution to PF/ESI alleging that the payment was not made by the appellant in accordance with the provi…

Adani Hazira Port Pvt. Ltd, Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT CPC, Bangalore

In the result appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed subject to direction

ITA 498/AHD/2020[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 May 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 498/Ahd/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2018-19 Adani Hazira Port Pvt. Ltd., D.C.I.T., Adani House, Vs. Cpc, Nr. Mithakhali Six Roads, Bangalore. Navrangpura, Ahmedabad.

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Chokshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Jamesh Kurian, C.I.T, D.R with Shri Purushottam Kumar, Sr.D.R
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

…. At the outset, we note that the issue on hand is squarely covered against the assessee by the order of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court of Gujarat in the case of A.Y. 2018-19 3 CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation India Limited reported in 366 ITR 170. However, at the time of hearing it was contended by the learned AR for the assessee that the above referred order of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court has been challenged before the Hon’ble Supreme court and outcome of the same is pending. Thus the ld. AR sought for the liberty of recalling the order in the event if the Hon’ble Supreme court revers…

M/S. Indigenous Bureau of India, Mumbai vs. CIT (A) NFAC, Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 82/MUM/2022[AY 2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2022

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos. 81 & 82 /Mum/2022 (A.Ys. 2018-19 & 2019-20) M/S Indigenous Bureau Vs. Cit(A) Of India (Formerly Known As Nfac, Delhi Investigation Bureau Of India) 164, 3Rd Floor, Zaveri Chambers, Modi Street, Fort, Mumbai – 400001 स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaafi1617H Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: N. B. GandhiFor Respondent: R.A. Dhyani
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ts. The CIT(A) has noted the case laws in favour of Revenue: 1. Popular Vehicles & Services (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT [2018] 96 taxmann.com 13/257 Taxman 120/406 ITR 150 (Ker.) 2. CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation [2014] 41 taxmann.com 100/223 Taxman 398/366 ITR 170 (Guj) 3. CIT v. Merchem Ltd. [2015] 61 taxmann.com 119/235 Taxman 291/378 ITR 443 (Ker.). The CIT(A) himself noted the ambiguity in para 7.4 of his order, which reads as under: 7.4 While rendering above decisions the Hon’ble High Courts had the occasion to examine and distinguish a catena of judgements which are usually relied upon by appellants…

M/S. Indigenous Bureau of India, Mumbai vs. CIT (A) NFAC, Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 81/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos. 81 & 82 /Mum/2022 (A.Ys. 2018-19 & 2019-20) M/S Indigenous Bureau Vs. Cit(A) Of India (Formerly Known As Nfac, Delhi Investigation Bureau Of India) 164, 3Rd Floor, Zaveri Chambers, Modi Street, Fort, Mumbai – 400001 स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaafi1617H Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: N. B. GandhiFor Respondent: R.A. Dhyani
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ts. The CIT(A) has noted the case laws in favour of Revenue: 1. Popular Vehicles & Services (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT [2018] 96 taxmann.com 13/257 Taxman 120/406 ITR 150 (Ker.) 2. CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation [2014] 41 taxmann.com 100/223 Taxman 398/366 ITR 170 (Guj) 3. CIT v. Merchem Ltd. [2015] 61 taxmann.com 119/235 Taxman 291/378 ITR 443 (Ker.). The CIT(A) himself noted the ambiguity in para 7.4 of his order, which reads as under: 7.4 While rendering above decisions the Hon’ble High Courts had the occasion to examine and distinguish a catena of judgements which are usually relied upon by appellants…

M/S. Sycone Cpmc Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 260/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 May 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaranassessment Year:2018-19 M/S. Sycone Cpmc Private Limited, No.36, 20Th Main, 2Nd Block, Rajajinagar, Dcit, Cpc, Vs. Bengaluru – 560 010. Bengaluru. Pan No : Aaics 3458 H Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri. Siddesh Nagaraj Gaddi, Ca Respondent By : Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel For Dept. Date Of Hearing : 31.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.05.2022 O R D E R Per B.R. Baskaran: The Assessee Has Filed This Appeal Challenging The Order Dated 25/02/2022 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)-11, Bangalore & It Relates To The Assessment Year 2018-19. The Solitary Issue Urged In This Appeal Relates To Disallowance Of Rs.8,58,090/-, Being Employees Contribution To Provident Fund & Esi, Made U/S 36(1)(Va) Of The Income-Tax Act,1961 ['The Act' For Short].

For Appellant: Shri. Siddesh Nagaraj Gaddi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing counsel for dept
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

…s made prior to the due date of filing of return of income u/s 139(1) of the I.T.Act. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court differed with the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation reported in 366 ITR 170 (Guj.). The Hon'ble High Court was considering following substantial question of law:- "Whether in law, the Tribunal was justified in affirming the finding of Assessing Officer in denying the appellant's claim of M/s. SYConE CPMC Private Limited Page 4 of 6 deductions of the employees contribution to PF/ESI alleging that the payment was not made…

Ashirwad Carbonics (India) Private Limtied, New Delhi vs. Circle-3(1), Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1721/DEL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2019-20

Section 139(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…vered under the amendment to Section 43B of I.T. Act – the Tribunal was right in holding that payments are subject to benefits of Section 43B. 8. We have examined the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of State Road Transport Corporation (366 ITR 170) wherein the court has held the the payment were not allowable u/s 36(1)(va).It was held as under: 4 | P a g e AY : 2019-20 “Section 43B, read with section 36(1)(va) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 Business disallowance - Certain deductions to be allowed on actual payment (employee's contribution) - whether where an employer has not credited sum re…

Aditya Flexipack LLP, Kanpur vs. The Assessing Officer, Kanpur

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

ITA 95/LKW/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 May 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R
Section 36(1)(v)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “A”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI. A. D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI T. S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.94 & 95/LKW/2022 Assessment Years: 2018-19and 2019-20 Aditya Flexipack LLP v. The Assessing Officer 22-B-1, Dadanagar Special Range Kanpur Kanpur TAN/PAN:AAEFA9952B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Rakesh Garg, Advocate Respondent by: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R. Date of hearing: 17 05 2022 Date of pronouncement: 30 05 2022 O R D E R PER BENCH: These are assessee’s appeals against the respective orders of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC, New Delhi, both dated 30.3.…

Aditya Flexipack LLP, Kanpur vs. The Assessing Officer, Special Range, Kanpur

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

ITA 94/LKW/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 May 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R
Section 36(1)(v)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “A”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI. A. D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI T. S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.94 & 95/LKW/2022 Assessment Years: 2018-19and 2019-20 Aditya Flexipack LLP v. The Assessing Officer 22-B-1, Dadanagar Special Range Kanpur Kanpur TAN/PAN:AAEFA9952B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Rakesh Garg, Advocate Respondent by: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R. Date of hearing: 17 05 2022 Date of pronouncement: 30 05 2022 O R D E R PER BENCH: These are assessee’s appeals against the respective orders of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC, New Delhi, both dated 30.3.…

M/S India Pesticides Ltd, Bareilly vs. DCIT-1, Bareilly

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

ITA 5/LKW/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 May 2022AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year: 2018-19 M/S India Pesticides Ltd. V. The Dcit-1 35-A, Civil Lines Bareilly Bareilly Tan/Pan:Aaaci3591D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: None (Written Submission) Respondent By: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 17 05 2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 30 05 2022 O R D E R

For Appellant: None (Written submission)For Respondent: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.r
Section 143Section 154

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “B”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI. A. D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI T. S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/s India Pesticides Ltd. v. The DCIT-1 35-A, Civil Lines Bareilly Bareilly TAN/PAN:AAACI3591D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: None (Written submission) Respondent by: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.r. Date of hearing: 17 05 2022 Date of pronouncement: 30 05 2022 O R D E R PER A. D. JAIN, V.P.: This is assessee’s appeal against the order of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC, New Delhi, dated 17.11.2021, for Assessment Year 2018-19, raising the following groun…

M/S Swarup Chemicals Pvt. Ltd, Bareilly vs. DCIT-1, Bareilly

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

ITA 4/LKW/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 May 2022AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

For Appellant: None (Written submission)For Respondent: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R
Section 143(1)(a)Section 154

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “B”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI. A. D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI T. S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.3 & 4/LKW/2022 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 M/s Swarup Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. v. The DCIT-1 35-A, Civil Lines Bareilly Bareilly TAN/PAN:AADCS8959E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: None (Written submission) Respondent by: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R. Date of hearing: 17 05 2022 Date of pronouncement: 30 05 2022 O R D E R PER BENCH: These are assessee’s appeals against the respective orders of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC, New Delhi, dated 2.11.2021, for Assessment…

Mr.Shitij Dhawan, Kanpur vs. The Assessing Officer, Kanpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 36/LKW/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 May 2022AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year: 2019-20 Mr. Shitij Dhawan V. The Assessing Officer 122/235, Fazalganj Special Range Kanpur Kanpur Tan/Pan:Acqpd3380G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Rakesh Garg, Advocate Respondent By: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 17 05 2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 30 05 2022 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R
Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “B”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI. A. D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI T. S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2019-20 Mr. Shitij Dhawan v. The Assessing Officer 122/235, Fazalganj Special Range Kanpur Kanpur TAN/PAN:ACQPD3380G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Rakesh Garg, Advocate Respondent by: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R. Date of hearing: 17 05 2022 Date of pronouncement: 30 05 2022 O R D E R PER A.D. JAIN, V.P.: This is assessee’s appeal against the order of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC, New Delhi, dated 17.11.2021, for Assessment Year 2019-20, raising the f…

M/S Swarup Chemicals Pvt. Ltd, Bareilly vs. DCIT--1, Bareilly

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

ITA 3/LKW/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 May 2022AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

For Appellant: None (Written submission)For Respondent: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R
Section 143(1)(a)Section 154

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “B”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI. A. D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI T. S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.3 & 4/LKW/2022 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 M/s Swarup Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. v. The DCIT-1 35-A, Civil Lines Bareilly Bareilly TAN/PAN:AADCS8959E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: None (Written submission) Respondent by: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R. Date of hearing: 17 05 2022 Date of pronouncement: 30 05 2022 O R D E R PER BENCH: These are assessee’s appeals against the respective orders of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC, New Delhi, dated 2.11.2021, for Assessment…

M/S Bright 4 Wheel Sales Private Limited, Lucknow vs. DCIT, Ward -1, Lucknow

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 15/LKW/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 May 2022AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year: 2018-19 M/S Bright 4 Wheel Sales V. The Dy. Cit Private Limited Ward 1 11/Cp-6, Vikas Nagar, Lucknow Ring Road, Lucknow Tan/Pan:Aaccb8810E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Ms. Shweta Mittal, C.A. Respondent By: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 17 05 2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 30 05 2022 O R D E R

For Appellant: Ms. Shweta Mittal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R
Section 139(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “B”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI. A. D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI T. S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/s Bright 4 Wheel Sales v. The Dy. CIT Private Limited Ward 1 11/CP-6, Vikas Nagar, Lucknow Ring Road, Lucknow TAN/PAN:AACCB8810E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Ms. Shweta Mittal, C.A. Respondent by: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R. Date of hearing: 17 05 2022 Date of pronouncement: 30 05 2022 O R D E R PER A.D. JAIN, V.P.: This is assessee’s appeal against the order of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC, New Delhi, dated 24.11.2021, for Assessment Year 201…