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.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation?

1,158 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (366 ITR 170), spanning 2015 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 139(1), Section 143(3), Section 2(24)(x), Section 250, Section 36(1)(va), Section 1961.

CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (366 ITR 170)

Deepkala Silk Heritage, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-5(2)(2), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 233/AHD/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Mar 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh C. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr. DR

Section 145(3)

…ground is against the assessee as the employee contribution was deposited after the due date of the PF and ESI Act but prior to the filing of the due date of return of income. The Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of State road Transport Corporation, 366 ITR 170 has held against the assessee. 10. The Ld. D.R. relied upon the Assessment Order and the order of the CIT(A). 11. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. 12. Ground no.2 is dismissed as the Ld. A.R. submitted that no prejudice will be caused to the assessee if the said ground is not adjudicated…

Suraj Kiran Fabrics, 8Th, Cloth Market, Pali, 306401, Rajasthan vs. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, Ward 23(3)(6)

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 1604/MUM/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalesuraj Kiran Fabrics Vs. Jurisdictional Ao 8Th, Cloth Market, Pali, Ward23(3)(6) Rajasthan-306401 Mumbai "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaafs1244A Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri Pavan Kumar Beerla Date Of Hearing 21.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 21 .03.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed An Appeal Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- Jodhpur, Passed U/S 154 & 250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Pavan Kumar Beerla

Section 139Section 143(1)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 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.). In holding so, 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 accordanc…

M/S Bbr (India) Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 92/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Mar 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Priyadarshini Mishra, Addl.CIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36Section 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…

DCIT, Circle- 10(1), New Delhi vs. G4S Facility Services (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2581/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Ms. Ananya Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Mr. Ishtiyaque Ahmad, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “C” DELHI BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.2581/DEL/2018 Assessment Year 2014-15 DCIT, v. G4S Facility Services (India) Pvt. Circle-10(1), Ltd., New Delhi. New Delhi. TAN/PAN: AABCG8346B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Adv. Respondent by: Mr. Ishtiyaque Ahmad, CIT Date of hearing: 24 03 2022 Date of pronouncement: 24 03 2022 O R D E R PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, A.M.: The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the Revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Inc…

M/S Google India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Centralized Processing Centre, Bangalore

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

ITA 81/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Mar 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Aliasgar Rampurwala, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Priyadarshini Mishra, Addl.CIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36Section 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…

Sharda Oil Industries Pvt. Ltd., Agra vs. Jurisdictional Officer, Circle-2(1)(1), Agra

In the result all the appeals filed by the

ITA 62/AGR/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: : Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2018-19 Sharda Oil Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Jo Circle-2(1)(1), 17, Tundla Road, Nunhai Agrau.P. Agrau.P. Pan: Aaecs1396L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2019-20 Prem Motors Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Jo Dcit/Acit, Circle-1(1) Kanwal Complex, B-32, A.G. Office Gwalior M.P. Road, Gwalior M.P. 474001 Pan: Aabcp2035Q (Respondent) (Appellant) Assessment Year: 2019-20 Karam Udyog Vs. Jo Circle - 1(1)(1) 9, Gailana Road Agra U.P. Agra U.P. Pan: Abbfk0897L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 139Section 142Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 36(1)(v)Section 36(1)(va)Section 438Section 43B

…ovident Fund, as to whether disallowable or not with reference to Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 43B, a similar question came up for consideration before Gujarat High Court in Commissioner of Income-Tax v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation, (2014) 366 ITR 170. Therein Assessee collected Rs. 51,06,02,712/- from its employees towards provident fund contribution but deposited Rs. 21,16,61,582/ - with provident fund trust. Thus there was a short fall of Rs. 24,89,41,130/-. This amount of short fall was treated by Assessing Officer as income of Assessee vide Secti on 2(24)(x) read with Section 36(1)(va) of…

Karam Udhog, Agra vs. J.A.O., Dy. CIT.., Circle-1(1)(1), Agra

In the result all the appeals filed by the

ITA 112/AGR/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 Mar 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: : Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2018-19 Sharda Oil Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Jo Circle-2(1)(1), 17, Tundla Road, Nunhai Agrau.P. Agrau.P. Pan: Aaecs1396L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2019-20 Prem Motors Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Jo Dcit/Acit, Circle-1(1) Kanwal Complex, B-32, A.G. Office Gwalior M.P. Road, Gwalior M.P. 474001 Pan: Aabcp2035Q (Respondent) (Appellant) Assessment Year: 2019-20 Karam Udyog Vs. Jo Circle - 1(1)(1) 9, Gailana Road Agra U.P. Agra U.P. Pan: Abbfk0897L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 139Section 142Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 36(1)(v)Section 36(1)(va)Section 438Section 43B

…ovident Fund, as to whether disallowable or not with reference to Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 43B, a similar question came up for consideration before Gujarat High Court in Commissioner of Income-Tax v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation, (2014) 366 ITR 170. Therein Assessee collected Rs. 51,06,02,712/- from its employees towards provident fund contribution but deposited Rs. 21,16,61,582/ - with provident fund trust. Thus there was a short fall of Rs. 24,89,41,130/-. This amount of short fall was treated by Assessing Officer as income of Assessee vide Secti on 2(24)(x) read with Section 36(1)(va) of…

Prem Motors Private Limited, Gwalior vs. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, DCIT/ACIT, Circle1(1), Gwalior

In the result all the appeals filed by the

ITA 100/AGR/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 Mar 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: : Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2018-19 Sharda Oil Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Jo Circle-2(1)(1), 17, Tundla Road, Nunhai Agrau.P. Agrau.P. Pan: Aaecs1396L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2019-20 Prem Motors Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Jo Dcit/Acit, Circle-1(1) Kanwal Complex, B-32, A.G. Office Gwalior M.P. Road, Gwalior M.P. 474001 Pan: Aabcp2035Q (Respondent) (Appellant) Assessment Year: 2019-20 Karam Udyog Vs. Jo Circle - 1(1)(1) 9, Gailana Road Agra U.P. Agra U.P. Pan: Abbfk0897L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 139Section 142Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 36(1)(v)Section 36(1)(va)Section 438Section 43B

…ovident Fund, as to whether disallowable or not with reference to Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 43B, a similar question came up for consideration before Gujarat High Court in Commissioner of Income-Tax v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation, (2014) 366 ITR 170. Therein Assessee collected Rs. 51,06,02,712/- from its employees towards provident fund contribution but deposited Rs. 21,16,61,582/ - with provident fund trust. Thus there was a short fall of Rs. 24,89,41,130/-. This amount of short fall was treated by Assessing Officer as income of Assessee vide Secti on 2(24)(x) read with Section 36(1)(va) of…

Tamannu Internationals P Ltd, Surat vs. The ITO, Ward, 2(1) (4), Surat

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

ITA 156/SRT/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Mar 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) 1 Karpara Project Engineering P. Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner 405, Sns Platina, Of Income Tax, Circle- Near Reliance Market, 1(1)(2), Surat. Behind J.H.Ambani School, Above Surat People’S Bank, Vesu, Surat – 395007. Pan: Aabck 8206 Aq Represented By Miss Chaitali Shah Ca Represented By Miss Anupma Singla Sr Dr 2 Sankalp Dyeing & Printing Mills Pvt. Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Ltd., Of Income Tax, Circle- Plot No.268, Road No.2, Gidc, Sachin, 2(1)(2), Surat. Surat. Pan: Aahcs 3980 P Represented By Represented By Sh Manish Malpani Ca Miss Anupma Singla Sr Dr 3 The Udhna Udyognagar Sahakari Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Sangh Ltd., Of Income Tax, Circle-1(2), Central Road No.10, Surat. P.O.Box No.1224, Udhyognagar, Udhna, Surat – 394 210. Pan: Aaaat 2932 K Represented By Represented By Sh. Rushi Parekh Ca Miss Anupma Singla Sr Dr 4 Riddhi Siddhi Prints Pvt Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Commissioner 75-1 & 75-2, Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1) G.I.D.C., Pandesara, (2), Surat. Surat – 394221. Pan: Aaccr 7050 C Represented By Represented By Miss Richa Toshniwal Ca Miss Anupma Singla Sr Dr Tamanna Internationals Pvt. Ltd. & (04) Others.

Section 143(2)Section 254(1)Section 36(1)(va)

…vant statutes. On appeal before the ld.CIT(A), the action of AO was upheld. The ld CIT(A) while confirming the disallowance under section 36(1)(va) also relied on the decision of Jurisdictional High Court in CIT Vs Gujarat State Roadway Transport Corporation (366 ITR 170 Guj). Further aggrieved, the assessee has filed present appeal before this Tribunal. 3. We have heard the submissions of the learned authorised representative (AR) of the assessee and the learned senior departmental representative (DR) for the revenue. The AR of the assessee fairly submits that issue of disallowance under section 36(1)(va) raised…

Riddhi Siddhi Prints Pvt Ltd., Surat vs. Assistant Commisioner of Income Tax, Cir.2(1)(2), Surat

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

ITA 149/SRT/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Mar 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) 1 Karpara Project Engineering P. Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner 405, Sns Platina, Of Income Tax, Circle- Near Reliance Market, 1(1)(2), Surat. Behind J.H.Ambani School, Above Surat People’S Bank, Vesu, Surat – 395007. Pan: Aabck 8206 Aq Represented By Miss Chaitali Shah Ca Represented By Miss Anupma Singla Sr Dr 2 Sankalp Dyeing & Printing Mills Pvt. Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Ltd., Of Income Tax, Circle- Plot No.268, Road No.2, Gidc, Sachin, 2(1)(2), Surat. Surat. Pan: Aahcs 3980 P Represented By Represented By Sh Manish Malpani Ca Miss Anupma Singla Sr Dr 3 The Udhna Udyognagar Sahakari Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Sangh Ltd., Of Income Tax, Circle-1(2), Central Road No.10, Surat. P.O.Box No.1224, Udhyognagar, Udhna, Surat – 394 210. Pan: Aaaat 2932 K Represented By Represented By Sh. Rushi Parekh Ca Miss Anupma Singla Sr Dr 4 Riddhi Siddhi Prints Pvt Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Commissioner 75-1 & 75-2, Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1) G.I.D.C., Pandesara, (2), Surat. Surat – 394221. Pan: Aaccr 7050 C Represented By Represented By Miss Richa Toshniwal Ca Miss Anupma Singla Sr Dr Tamanna Internationals Pvt. Ltd. & (04) Others.

Section 143(2)Section 254(1)Section 36(1)(va)

…vant statutes. On appeal before the ld.CIT(A), the action of AO was upheld. The ld CIT(A) while confirming the disallowance under section 36(1)(va) also relied on the decision of Jurisdictional High Court in CIT Vs Gujarat State Roadway Transport Corporation (366 ITR 170 Guj). Further aggrieved, the assessee has filed present appeal before this Tribunal. 3. We have heard the submissions of the learned authorised representative (AR) of the assessee and the learned senior departmental representative (DR) for the revenue. The AR of the assessee fairly submits that issue of disallowance under section 36(1)(va) raised…

The Udhna Udyognagar Sahakari Sangh Ltd., Surat vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Cir. 1(2), Surat

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

ITA 106/SRT/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Mar 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) 1 Karpara Project Engineering P. Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner 405, Sns Platina, Of Income Tax, Circle- Near Reliance Market, 1(1)(2), Surat. Behind J.H.Ambani School, Above Surat People’S Bank, Vesu, Surat – 395007. Pan: Aabck 8206 Aq Represented By Miss Chaitali Shah Ca Represented By Miss Anupma Singla Sr Dr 2 Sankalp Dyeing & Printing Mills Pvt. Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Ltd., Of Income Tax, Circle- Plot No.268, Road No.2, Gidc, Sachin, 2(1)(2), Surat. Surat. Pan: Aahcs 3980 P Represented By Represented By Sh Manish Malpani Ca Miss Anupma Singla Sr Dr 3 The Udhna Udyognagar Sahakari Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Sangh Ltd., Of Income Tax, Circle-1(2), Central Road No.10, Surat. P.O.Box No.1224, Udhyognagar, Udhna, Surat – 394 210. Pan: Aaaat 2932 K Represented By Represented By Sh. Rushi Parekh Ca Miss Anupma Singla Sr Dr 4 Riddhi Siddhi Prints Pvt Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Commissioner 75-1 & 75-2, Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1) G.I.D.C., Pandesara, (2), Surat. Surat – 394221. Pan: Aaccr 7050 C Represented By Represented By Miss Richa Toshniwal Ca Miss Anupma Singla Sr Dr Tamanna Internationals Pvt. Ltd. & (04) Others.

Section 143(2)Section 254(1)Section 36(1)(va)

…vant statutes. On appeal before the ld.CIT(A), the action of AO was upheld. The ld CIT(A) while confirming the disallowance under section 36(1)(va) also relied on the decision of Jurisdictional High Court in CIT Vs Gujarat State Roadway Transport Corporation (366 ITR 170 Guj). Further aggrieved, the assessee has filed present appeal before this Tribunal. 3. We have heard the submissions of the learned authorised representative (AR) of the assessee and the learned senior departmental representative (DR) for the revenue. The AR of the assessee fairly submits that issue of disallowance under section 36(1)(va) raised…

Sankalp Dyeing & Printing Mills Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 2(1)(2), Surat

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

ITA 45/SRT/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) 1 Karpara Project Engineering P. Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner 405, Sns Platina, Of Income Tax, Circle- Near Reliance Market, 1(1)(2), Surat. Behind J.H.Ambani School, Above Surat People’S Bank, Vesu, Surat – 395007. Pan: Aabck 8206 Aq Represented By Miss Chaitali Shah Ca Represented By Miss Anupma Singla Sr Dr 2 Sankalp Dyeing & Printing Mills Pvt. Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Ltd., Of Income Tax, Circle- Plot No.268, Road No.2, Gidc, Sachin, 2(1)(2), Surat. Surat. Pan: Aahcs 3980 P Represented By Represented By Sh Manish Malpani Ca Miss Anupma Singla Sr Dr 3 The Udhna Udyognagar Sahakari Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Sangh Ltd., Of Income Tax, Circle-1(2), Central Road No.10, Surat. P.O.Box No.1224, Udhyognagar, Udhna, Surat – 394 210. Pan: Aaaat 2932 K Represented By Represented By Sh. Rushi Parekh Ca Miss Anupma Singla Sr Dr 4 Riddhi Siddhi Prints Pvt Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Commissioner 75-1 & 75-2, Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1) G.I.D.C., Pandesara, (2), Surat. Surat – 394221. Pan: Aaccr 7050 C Represented By Represented By Miss Richa Toshniwal Ca Miss Anupma Singla Sr Dr Tamanna Internationals Pvt. Ltd. & (04) Others.

Section 143(2)Section 254(1)Section 36(1)(va)

…vant statutes. On appeal before the ld.CIT(A), the action of AO was upheld. The ld CIT(A) while confirming the disallowance under section 36(1)(va) also relied on the decision of Jurisdictional High Court in CIT Vs Gujarat State Roadway Transport Corporation (366 ITR 170 Guj). Further aggrieved, the assessee has filed present appeal before this Tribunal. 3. We have heard the submissions of the learned authorised representative (AR) of the assessee and the learned senior departmental representative (DR) for the revenue. The AR of the assessee fairly submits that issue of disallowance under section 36(1)(va) raised…

Karpara Project Engineering Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Surat

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

ITA 309/SRT/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) 1 Karpara Project Engineering P. Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner 405, Sns Platina, Of Income Tax, Circle- Near Reliance Market, 1(1)(2), Surat. Behind J.H.Ambani School, Above Surat People’S Bank, Vesu, Surat – 395007. Pan: Aabck 8206 Aq Represented By Miss Chaitali Shah Ca Represented By Miss Anupma Singla Sr Dr 2 Sankalp Dyeing & Printing Mills Pvt. Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Ltd., Of Income Tax, Circle- Plot No.268, Road No.2, Gidc, Sachin, 2(1)(2), Surat. Surat. Pan: Aahcs 3980 P Represented By Represented By Sh Manish Malpani Ca Miss Anupma Singla Sr Dr 3 The Udhna Udyognagar Sahakari Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Sangh Ltd., Of Income Tax, Circle-1(2), Central Road No.10, Surat. P.O.Box No.1224, Udhyognagar, Udhna, Surat – 394 210. Pan: Aaaat 2932 K Represented By Represented By Sh. Rushi Parekh Ca Miss Anupma Singla Sr Dr 4 Riddhi Siddhi Prints Pvt Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Commissioner 75-1 & 75-2, Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1) G.I.D.C., Pandesara, (2), Surat. Surat – 394221. Pan: Aaccr 7050 C Represented By Represented By Miss Richa Toshniwal Ca Miss Anupma Singla Sr Dr Tamanna Internationals Pvt. Ltd. & (04) Others.

Section 143(2)Section 254(1)Section 36(1)(va)

…vant statutes. On appeal before the ld.CIT(A), the action of AO was upheld. The ld CIT(A) while confirming the disallowance under section 36(1)(va) also relied on the decision of Jurisdictional High Court in CIT Vs Gujarat State Roadway Transport Corporation (366 ITR 170 Guj). Further aggrieved, the assessee has filed present appeal before this Tribunal. 3. We have heard the submissions of the learned authorised representative (AR) of the assessee and the learned senior departmental representative (DR) for the revenue. The AR of the assessee fairly submits that issue of disallowance under section 36(1)(va) raised…

Viskan Logistics Services Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 639/BANG/2021[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Sri.V.Sridhar, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sankar Ganesh D, JCIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 36Section 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…

Viskan Logistics Services Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 638/BANG/2021[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Sri.V.Sridhar, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sankar Ganesh D, JCIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 36Section 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…

Viskan Logistics Services Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 637/BANG/2021[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Sri.V.Sridhar, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sankar Ganesh D, JCIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 36Section 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…

M/S Global Polymers, Agra vs. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, Circle-1(1)(1), Agra

In the result all the appeals filed by the

ITA 93/AGR/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Agra21 Mar 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: : Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Krishna Kanha Shelters Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Acit Circle – 2(1)(2) Pushpanjali Palace Delhi Gate Sanjay Place, Agra U.P. Agra U.P. Pan: Aacck7160L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S Banmoreelecticals Pvt Ltd Vs. Dcit Behind Park Hotel, Moti Mahal, Road City Centre Gwalior M.P. Gwalior M.P. Pan: Aabcb4242M (Respondent) (Appellant)

…ovident Fund, as to whether disallowable or not with reference to Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 43B, a similar question came up for consideration before Gujarat High Court in Commissioner of Income-Tax v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation, (2014) 366 ITR 170. Therein Assessee collected Rs. 51,06,02,712/- from its employees towards provident fund contribution but deposited Rs. 21,16,61,582/ - with provident fund trust. Thus there was a short fall of Rs. 24,89,41,130/-. This amount of short fall was treated by Assessing Officer as income of Assessee vide Section 2(24)(x) read with Section 36(1)(va) of…

M/S Radish Technologies, Aligarh vs. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, Circle-4(1)(1), Aligarh

In the result all the appeals filed by the

ITA 92/AGR/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Agra21 Mar 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: : Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Krishna Kanha Shelters Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Acit Circle – 2(1)(2) Pushpanjali Palace Delhi Gate Sanjay Place, Agra U.P. Agra U.P. Pan: Aacck7160L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S Banmoreelecticals Pvt Ltd Vs. Dcit Behind Park Hotel, Moti Mahal, Road City Centre Gwalior M.P. Gwalior M.P. Pan: Aabcb4242M (Respondent) (Appellant)

…ovident Fund, as to whether disallowable or not with reference to Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 43B, a similar question came up for consideration before Gujarat High Court in Commissioner of Income-Tax v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation, (2014) 366 ITR 170. Therein Assessee collected Rs. 51,06,02,712/- from its employees towards provident fund contribution but deposited Rs. 21,16,61,582/ - with provident fund trust. Thus there was a short fall of Rs. 24,89,41,130/-. This amount of short fall was treated by Assessing Officer as income of Assessee vide Section 2(24)(x) read with Section 36(1)(va) of…

Amar Shoe & Leather Wears, Agra vs. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, Circle-1(1)(1), Agra

In the result all the appeals filed by the

ITA 91/AGR/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Agra21 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: : Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Krishna Kanha Shelters Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Acit Circle – 2(1)(2) Pushpanjali Palace Delhi Gate Sanjay Place, Agra U.P. Agra U.P. Pan: Aacck7160L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S Banmoreelecticals Pvt Ltd Vs. Dcit Behind Park Hotel, Moti Mahal, Road City Centre Gwalior M.P. Gwalior M.P. Pan: Aabcb4242M (Respondent) (Appellant)

…ovident Fund, as to whether disallowable or not with reference to Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 43B, a similar question came up for consideration before Gujarat High Court in Commissioner of Income-Tax v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation, (2014) 366 ITR 170. Therein Assessee collected Rs. 51,06,02,712/- from its employees towards provident fund contribution but deposited Rs. 21,16,61,582/ - with provident fund trust. Thus there was a short fall of Rs. 24,89,41,130/-. This amount of short fall was treated by Assessing Officer as income of Assessee vide Section 2(24)(x) read with Section 36(1)(va) of…

R N Bajaj Overseas, Agra vs. DCIT, CPC Bengaluru, Agra

In the result all the appeals filed by the

ITA 89/AGR/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Agra21 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: : Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Krishna Kanha Shelters Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Acit Circle – 2(1)(2) Pushpanjali Palace Delhi Gate Sanjay Place, Agra U.P. Agra U.P. Pan: Aacck7160L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S Banmoreelecticals Pvt Ltd Vs. Dcit Behind Park Hotel, Moti Mahal, Road City Centre Gwalior M.P. Gwalior M.P. Pan: Aabcb4242M (Respondent) (Appellant)

…ovident Fund, as to whether disallowable or not with reference to Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 43B, a similar question came up for consideration before Gujarat High Court in Commissioner of Income-Tax v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation, (2014) 366 ITR 170. Therein Assessee collected Rs. 51,06,02,712/- from its employees towards provident fund contribution but deposited Rs. 21,16,61,582/ - with provident fund trust. Thus there was a short fall of Rs. 24,89,41,130/-. This amount of short fall was treated by Assessing Officer as income of Assessee vide Section 2(24)(x) read with Section 36(1)(va) of…

CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation

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

Also referred to as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation

Deepkala Silk Heritage, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-5(2)(2), Ahmedabad

Suraj Kiran Fabrics, 8Th, Cloth Market, Pali, 306401, Rajasthan vs. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, Ward 23(3)(6)

M/S Bbr (India) Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

DCIT, Circle- 10(1), New Delhi vs. G4S Facility Services (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

M/S Google India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Centralized Processing Centre, Bangalore

Sharda Oil Industries Pvt. Ltd., Agra vs. Jurisdictional Officer, Circle-2(1)(1), Agra

Karam Udhog, Agra vs. J.A.O., Dy. CIT.., Circle-1(1)(1), Agra

Prem Motors Private Limited, Gwalior vs. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, DCIT/ACIT, Circle1(1), Gwalior

Tamannu Internationals P Ltd, Surat vs. The ITO, Ward, 2(1) (4), Surat

Riddhi Siddhi Prints Pvt Ltd., Surat vs. Assistant Commisioner of Income Tax, Cir.2(1)(2), Surat

The Udhna Udyognagar Sahakari Sangh Ltd., Surat vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Cir. 1(2), Surat

Sankalp Dyeing & Printing Mills Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 2(1)(2), Surat

Karpara Project Engineering Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Surat

Viskan Logistics Services Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

Viskan Logistics Services Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

Viskan Logistics Services Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

M/S Global Polymers, Agra vs. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, Circle-1(1)(1), Agra

M/S Radish Technologies, Aligarh vs. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, Circle-4(1)(1), Aligarh

Amar Shoe & Leather Wears, Agra vs. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, Circle-1(1)(1), Agra

R N Bajaj Overseas, Agra vs. DCIT, CPC Bengaluru, Agra