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 367,164 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

Laxminarayan Synthetics, Surat vs. DCIT, Circle- 2(1)(1), Surat

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessee, are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 201/SRT/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Mar 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.147 & 234/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2018-19 To 2019-20) (Virtual Court Hearing) Rekha R. Shokla, Vs. The Dcit, Cpc, G-3, Deepanjali Appartment, Sai Bangalore. Krupa Society, No.4-Airport Road, Nani Daman. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Bgyps2563M (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.150/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2018-19) Riddhi Siddhi Prints Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Dcit, Cpc, 75-1 & 75-2, Gidc, Pandesara, Bangalore. Surat-394221, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaccr7050C (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.160/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2019-20) Chinco Textiles, Vs. The Acit, Cpc, Plot No.104, Road No.7, Gidc Bangalore. Sachin, Surat-394230. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaefc0028N (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.201 & 202/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2018-19 To 2019-20) Shree Laxminarayan Synthetics, Vs. The Dcit, Circle-2(1)(1), Plot No.275/2, Gidc, Pandesara, Surat. Surat, Gujarat-394221. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aakfs5319N (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.224 & 225/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2018-19 To 2019-20) Tirupati Prints, Vs. The Adit, Cpc, S. No.207, Plot No.37 To 40, Bangalore. Bamroli Taluka: Choryasi, Surat-394221, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabft4240J (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 36

…of debatable nature then perhaps there was no need to make amendment to section 36(1)(va) by inserting the Explanation referred above w.e.f. 01.04.2021.  Thus, although the decision of Gujarat High Court in case of Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation - 366 ITR 170 provides for disallowance of employees contribution to provident fund if it is not paid on or before the due date prescribed under the PF laws, the said decision cannot be applied for making adjustment in the intimation issued under section 143(1) as debatable issues are outside the purview of such adjustment. ITA.147,234,150,160,201,202,224,225,…

Sri Annapyrna Roller Flour Mill, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad

Appeal is allowed

ITA 693/HYD/2020[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Mar 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara

For Appellant: Ms. Shika Mantri and Shri Sidharth Mantri, ARFor Respondent: Smt. N. Esther, D.R
Section 139(1)Section 154

…our Mill , Hyd. representative fails to dispute that hon’ble high courts have adopted varying opinions regarding correctness of the impugned claim. Take for instance the case law against the assessee i.e. CIT vs Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (2014) 366 ITR 170 (Guj.) and in favour of assessee CIT vs. AIMIL Ltd. 229 CTR 118 (2010) (Del) Bihar State Warehousing Corpn vs CIT 38 ITR 140 (Pat). It is thus clear that the impugned disallowance issue has been wrongly raised by the Assessing Officer in sec.154 proceedings on a debatable issue as per TS Balram vs. Volkart Brothers (1971) 82 ITR 50 (SC). I theref…

Manoj Kumar, Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle-62(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 978/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Mar 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant[Through Video Conferencing]

Section 143(3)

…lar No. 22/2015, dated 17/12/2015 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) disallowed the payment toward ESI/EPF. The Ld. CIT(A) following the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation, 366 ITR 170 upheld the disallowance. While delivering the above decision, Hon’ble Gujarat High Court has considered the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs Alom Extrusions Ltd 319 ITR 306. 5.2 Before us, the Learned Counsel of the assessee submitted that Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT-7 Vs. Pro Interactive Service (India…

Unnat Engineering Private Limited, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1)(4), Surat

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

ITA 81/SRT/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat07 Jan 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble(Virtual Hearing) आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.81/Srt/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Unnat Engineering Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 16-17, Ambica Nagar Society, Ward-2(1)(4), Surat. Hazira Road, Ichhapore, Surat. [Pan: Aaacu 7439 A] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रतीक"ओर से /Assessee By Shri Rakesh Shah – Ca राज"वक"ओर से /Revenue By Smt. Anupama Singla – Sr.Dr

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…. On merit, the AR of the assessee fairly submits that issue of disallowance under section 36(1)(va) raised by the assessee is covered against him by the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in case of CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation [2014] 366 ITR 170 (Guj). The AR further submitted Special Leave Petition(SLP) that especially petition filed by the Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation(GSRTC) against the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court has been admitted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Therefore, the appeal of the assessee either may be kept in abeyance or may be restore to the Ld.CIT(A)…

Sach Electro Mech Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(2), Surat

In the result ground No. 4 of the appeal is allowed

ITA 262/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat09 Oct 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble(Virtual Court - Virtual Hearing) आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.262/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sach Electro Mech Pvt. Ltd., V The Income Tax Officer, C/2, Maheshwari Apartment, S Ward-2(1)(2), Surat. Timaliyawad, Nanpura, . Surat – 395 001. [Pan: Aaics 8963 M] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee By Shri Manish J.Shah – Ar राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue By Mrs. Anupam Singla – Sr.Dr

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(v)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 40Section 43B

…आयकरअपील"यअ"धकरण,सुरत "यायपीठ,सुरत IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, Hon'ble JUDICIAL MEMBER AND Dr ARJUN LAL SAINI, Hon'ble ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Virtual Court - Virtual Hearing) आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.262/AHD/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sach Electro Mech Pvt. Ltd., V The Income Tax Officer, C/2, Maheshwari Apartment, s Ward-2(1)(2), Surat. Timaliyawad, Nanpura, . Surat – 395 001. [PAN: AAICS 8963 M] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee by Shri Manish J.Shah – AR राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue by Mrs. Anupam Singla – Sr.DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date of…

Ascent Industrial Estate, Silvassa vs. Dy.CIT Circle-Vapi, Vapi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 4/SRT/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat01 Oct 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble(Virtual Court Virtual Hearing) आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.4/Srt/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Ascent Meditech Ltd., Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of Survey No.678/13, 1St Floor, Income Tax, Sai Industrial Estate, Vapi Circle, Vapi. Phase-2, Naroli, Silvassa. [Pan: Aakca 6302 L] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee By Shri Parlimalsinh B.Parmar – Ar राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue By Mrs. Anupam Singla – Sr.Dr

Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(v)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ed Authorised Representative( Ld. AR) of the assessee submits that the grounds raised by the assessee is covered against the assessee by the decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (GSRTC) reported 366 ITR 170. The ld.AR of the assessee submits that since the issue is squarely covered against the assessee, therefore the appeal may be dismissed as not pressed. 4. On the other hand, the ld. Departmental Representative (DR) agreed with the submission of the ld.AR of the assessee. The Ld. DR for the revenue submits that the appeal may be dismissed. 5. We…

Srinivasa Fashins Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. ITO Corporate Ward-6(4), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1396/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Sept 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Duvvuru R.L.Reddy)नधा+रण वष+ /Assessment Year: 2014-15 Heard Through Video Conferencing V. M/S.Srinivasa Fashions Pvt. Ltd., The Income Tax Officer, No.57G, Sidco Industrial Estate, Corporate Ward-6(4), Ambattur, Chennai. Chennai-600 098. [Pan: Aaics 9511 R] (अपीलाथ./Appellant) (/0यथ./Respondent) : अपीलाथ. क1 ओर से/ Appellant By Mr.N.Vijay Kumar, Ca : Mr.Ar.V.Sreenivasan, Jcit /0यथ. क1 ओर से /Respondent By : 28.09.2020 सुनवाई क1 तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 28.09.2020 घोषणा क1 तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar:

For Respondent: 28.09.2020
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 68

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी र"मत कोचर, लेखा सद"य एवं "ी धु#वु$ आर.एल. रे&डी, "या)यक सद"य के सम* BEFORE SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DUVVURU R.L.REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER )नधा+रण वष+ /Assessment Year: 2014-15 HEARD THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING v. M/s.Srinivasa Fashions Pvt. Ltd., The Income Tax Officer, No.57G, Sidco Industrial Estate, Corporate Ward-6(4), Ambattur, Chennai. Chennai-600 098. [PAN: AAICS 9511 R] (अपीलाथ./Appellant) (/0यथ./Respondent) : अपीलाथ. क1 ओर से/ Appellant by Mr.N.Vijay Kumar, CA : Mr.AR.V.Sreenivasan, JCIT /…

Drs Dilip Roadlines Pvt.Ltd., Hyd, Secunderabad vs. ITO, Ward-17(1), Hyd, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1212/HYD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Sept 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2013-14 (Through Video Conference) Drs Dilip Roadlines Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Hyderabad. Ward – 17(1), Hyderabad. Pan – Aadcd 1865 C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri M.V. Anil KumarFor Respondent: Shri Arvindakshan RS

…n as such amendment is not with reference to section 36(1)(va). In support of such contention, he relied upon a ITA No. 143/H/13 and others VBC Industries Ltd. decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in case of CIT Vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation, 366 ITR 170. 15. Opposing the contention of ld. DR, ld. Counsel for assessee submitted before us, after deletion of the second proviso to section 43B of the Act, even employee’s contribution to PF & ESI if remitted before due date of filing of return as provided u/s 139(1) is allowable as deduction u/s 43B of the Act. In support of such contention, ld. AR re…

The DCIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Adani Wilmair Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the CO. of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1761/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Aug 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1761/Ahd/2016 With C.O. No.133/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 D.C.I.T., Adani Wilmar Ltd., Circle-1(1)(1), Vs. “Fortune House”, Ahmedabad. Near Adani House Mithakali Cross Roads, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad Pan: Aabca8056G

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate with Shri Parin Shah, &For Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr. D.R
Section 10(34)Section 14ASection 41(1)

…No.133/Ahd/2016 Asstt. Year 2011-12 13 28. At the outset, the learned AR for the assessee before us agreed that the issue stands covered against the assessee by virtue of the judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT versus GSRTC reported in 366 ITR 170 . On the other hand, the learned DR vehemently supported the order of the authorities below. 29. Heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the materials available on record. The deduction for the delayed deposit made to the employees Provident fund and ESIC is not eligible for deduction by virtue of the decision of Hon’ble Guja…

DCIT Corporate Circle 5(1), Chennai vs. Repco Home Finance P Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA no

ITA 2885/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jun 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: JCITFor Respondent: Shri M. Viswanathan, C.A
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 36(1)(viii)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘ A’ BENCH : CHENNAI "ी जॉज" माथन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी र"मत कोचर, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HEARD THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.2885/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 The Deputy Commissioner M/s. Repco Home Finance v. Pvt. Ltd., of Income Tax, 33, North Usman Road, Corporate Circle-5(1), T.Nagar, Chennai-600034 Chennai – 600 017. [PAN: AAACR 0209 F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Shri ARV Sreenivasan, अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/…

The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Vapi Circle, Vapi vs. M/S. Mitsu Limited, Daman

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3510/AHD/2016[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Surat04 May 2020AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri Sandip Gosain & Shri O. P. Meenav. ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं././././I "नधा"र अपीलाथ" Appellant S .T.A No. ण N वष"/A Y: 1 1671/Ah 2002- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant D/2006 03 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 2 1371/Ah 2002- Assistant V. M/S. Mitsu Limited, D/2006 03 Commissioner Of 304/2, Iind Phase, Income Tax-Vapi Gidc, Vapi 396195 Circle, Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Co.No.1 2002- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant 3 84/Ahd/ 03 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of 2006 Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 4 1672/Ah 2003- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant D/2006 04 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 5 1764/Ah 2003- Assistant V. M/S. Mitsu Limited, D/2006 04 Commissioner Of 304/2, Iind Phase, Income Tax-Vapi Gidc, Vapi 396195 Circle, Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q 6 1000/Ah 2002- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant D/2016 03 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 7 3510/Ah 2000- Assistant V. M/S. Mitsu Limited, D/2016 01 Commissioner Of Page 2 Of 83 Mitsu Ltd. V. Acit- Vapi/I.T.A. No.1671-1371,Co-184,1672-1764,1614 &1000/Ahd/2006/A.Y.02-03,03-04,06-07.02-03 Income Tax-Vapi 304/2, Iind Phase, Circle, Vapi Gidc, Vapi 396195 Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q

Section 143

…yment of PF and ESIC has not been paid within due date prescribed under the respective statutes i.e. PF Act and ESIC Rules. Therefore, in the light of decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation [2014] 366 ITR 170 (Guj) : 223 Taxman 398 : [2014] 41 Page 42 of 83 Mitsu Ltd. v. ACIT- Vapi/I.T.A. No.1671-1371,CO-184,1672-1764,1614 &1000/AHD/2006/A.Y.02-03,03-04,06-07.02-03 taxmann.com 100 (2014) (1) TML 502 -Guj-HC is not allowable as deduction under section 43B of the Act. 77. Per contra, the learned counsel for the assessee supported the order of Ld. CIT (…

M/S. Mitsu Private Limited, Vapi vs. The ACIT, Vapi Circle, Vapi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1000/AHD/2016[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Surat04 May 2020AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Sandip Gosain & Shri O. P. Meenav. ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं././././I "नधा"र अपीलाथ" Appellant S .T.A No. ण N वष"/A Y: 1 1671/Ah 2002- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant D/2006 03 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 2 1371/Ah 2002- Assistant V. M/S. Mitsu Limited, D/2006 03 Commissioner Of 304/2, Iind Phase, Income Tax-Vapi Gidc, Vapi 396195 Circle, Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Co.No.1 2002- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant 3 84/Ahd/ 03 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of 2006 Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 4 1672/Ah 2003- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant D/2006 04 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 5 1764/Ah 2003- Assistant V. M/S. Mitsu Limited, D/2006 04 Commissioner Of 304/2, Iind Phase, Income Tax-Vapi Gidc, Vapi 396195 Circle, Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q 6 1000/Ah 2002- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant D/2016 03 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 7 3510/Ah 2000- Assistant V. M/S. Mitsu Limited, D/2016 01 Commissioner Of Page 2 Of 83 Mitsu Ltd. V. Acit- Vapi/I.T.A. No.1671-1371,Co-184,1672-1764,1614 &1000/Ahd/2006/A.Y.02-03,03-04,06-07.02-03 Income Tax-Vapi 304/2, Iind Phase, Circle, Vapi Gidc, Vapi 396195 Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q

Section 143

…yment of PF and ESIC has not been paid within due date prescribed under the respective statutes i.e. PF Act and ESIC Rules. Therefore, in the light of decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation [2014] 366 ITR 170 (Guj) : 223 Taxman 398 : [2014] 41 Page 42 of 83 Mitsu Ltd. v. ACIT- Vapi/I.T.A. No.1671-1371,CO-184,1672-1764,1614 &1000/AHD/2006/A.Y.02-03,03-04,06-07.02-03 taxmann.com 100 (2014) (1) TML 502 -Guj-HC is not allowable as deduction under section 43B of the Act. 77. Per contra, the learned counsel for the assessee supported the order of Ld. CIT (…

The DCIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Arvind Smartspaces Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue and CO filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1507/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Mar 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1507/Ahd/2018 With C.O. 79/Ahd/2019 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2014-2015 D.C.I.T, Arvind Smartspaces Ltd., Circle-1(1)(1), Vs. 24, Government Sevant’S Society, Ahmedabad. Nr. Municpal Market, Off. C.G. Road, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009. Pan: Aahca5001H

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Chokshi, A.R
Section 14ASection 199Section 36(1)(iii)

…tion to P.F. 23. At the outset, the Ld.AR for the assessee agreed that the assessee is not eligible for deduction on account of late payment of employees Contributiuon by the order of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT versus GSRTC reported in 366 ITR 170 wherein it was held as under: “In view of the above and considering section 36(1)(va), read with sub-clause (x) of clause (24) of section 2, it is to be held that with respect to the sum received by the assessee from any of his employees to which provisions of sub-clause (x) of clause (24) of section 2 applies, the assessee shall be entitled to…

Adani Properties Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 1965/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Feb 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1965/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2013-2014 M/S. Adani Properties Pvt. Ltd., D.C.I.T, 8Th Floor, Shikhar, Vs. Cirle-1(1)(1) Nr. Mithakhali Six Roads, Ahmedabad. Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009. Pan: Aabca3182H

For Appellant: Shri Biren Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri L.P. Jain, Sr.D.R
Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 14A

…ESI. 11. At the outset the learned AR for the assessee fairly agreed that the issue raised by the assessee is covered against it by the order of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation reported in 366 ITR 170 wherein it was held as under: 8. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, and considering section 36(1)(va) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 read with sub-clause (x) of clause 24 of section 2, it is held that with respect to the sum received by the assessee from any of his employees to which provisions of sub-clause (x) of clause (24) of…

Excel Academy of Security Training Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-17(2), Hyderabad

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

ITA 1797/HYD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Jan 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Bleexcel Academy Of Security Vs. Ito, Ward-17(2), Training Private Limited, Hyderabad. 6-3-652, A/3, 1St Floor Kautilya, Amrutha Estates, Nims Road, Somajiguda, Hyderabad. Pan No. Aabce 2896 E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri ASRSS Siva Prasad–ARFor Respondent: Shri AC Rout – Sr.DR
Section 139(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 6

…d that employees’ contribution to provident fund is allowed as deduction, if the same is deposited on or before the due date specified under the provisions of provident fund Act. The D.R. also relied upon the decision of Gujarat High Court, reported in (2014) 366 ITR 170, wherein the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court held that since assessee had not deposited said contribution to respective fund account on the date as prescribed in explanation to section 36(1)(va) of the Act, disallowance made by the A.O. was just and proper. Though, the D.R. relied upon certain judicial precedents which are in favour of the revenue, in…

C. Doctor India Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. CIT, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2834/AHD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Jan 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble"नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2014-2015 C. Dotor India P.Ltd. Dcit, Cir.1(1)(2) Ahmedabad. Plot No.3607 To 3608, Gidc Estate Vs. Phase-Iv, Vatva Ahmedabad 382 445 Pan : Aaaci 3673 A (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri L.P.Jain, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 06/01/2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/01/2020 आदेश/O R D E R

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri L.P.Jain, Sr.DR
Section 139(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 436Section 438Section 43B

…139(1) of the I.T. Act. On careful consideration of observation of Assessing Officer and contention of appellant, I observe that entire issue is covered against appellant by decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High court in case of State Road Transport Corporation (366 ITR 170) wherein it is 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 (Employees contribution) - Whether where an employer has not credited sum received by it as employees' contribution to employees' account in relevant fund on or before d…

Kifs Securities Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(3), Ahmedabad

In the result Ground No.9 of the revenue is allowed for

ITA 63/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon'Ble Justice P.P.Bhatt & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

Section 111ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 43B

…to PF and ESI at Rs.1,05,190/-, Rs.1,32,396/-, Rs.26,323/-, Rs.18,497/- and Rs.10,785/- respectively. Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance following the judgment of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT V/s Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation 366 ITR 170 (Guj.). Assessee has challenged the disallowance for all the five assessment years before us. 9. At the outset Ld. Counsel for the assessee fairly conceded that the common issue relating to disallowance u/s 43B for delay in depositing employee’s provident fund is squarely covered against the assessee by the judgment of Hon'ble jurisdictional Hig…

Kifs Securities Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(3), Ahmedabad

In the result Ground No.9 of the revenue is allowed for

ITA 1885/AHD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon'Ble Justice P.P.Bhatt & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

Section 111ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 43B

…to PF and ESI at Rs.1,05,190/-, Rs.1,32,396/-, Rs.26,323/-, Rs.18,497/- and Rs.10,785/- respectively. Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance following the judgment of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT V/s Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation 366 ITR 170 (Guj.). Assessee has challenged the disallowance for all the five assessment years before us. 9. At the outset Ld. Counsel for the assessee fairly conceded that the common issue relating to disallowance u/s 43B for delay in depositing employee’s provident fund is squarely covered against the assessee by the judgment of Hon'ble jurisdictional Hig…

Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(3), Ahmedabad vs. Kifs Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result Ground No.9 of the revenue is allowed for

ITA 914/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon'Ble Justice P.P.Bhatt & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

Section 111ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 43B

…to PF and ESI at Rs.1,05,190/-, Rs.1,32,396/-, Rs.26,323/-, Rs.18,497/- and Rs.10,785/- respectively. Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance following the judgment of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT V/s Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation 366 ITR 170 (Guj.). Assessee has challenged the disallowance for all the five assessment years before us. 9. At the outset Ld. Counsel for the assessee fairly conceded that the common issue relating to disallowance u/s 43B for delay in depositing employee’s provident fund is squarely covered against the assessee by the judgment of Hon'ble jurisdictional Hig…

Kifs Securities Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(3), Ahmedabad

In the result Ground No.9 of the revenue is allowed for

ITA 786/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon'Ble Justice P.P.Bhatt & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

Section 111ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 43B

…to PF and ESI at Rs.1,05,190/-, Rs.1,32,396/-, Rs.26,323/-, Rs.18,497/- and Rs.10,785/- respectively. Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance following the judgment of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT V/s Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation 366 ITR 170 (Guj.). Assessee has challenged the disallowance for all the five assessment years before us. 9. At the outset Ld. Counsel for the assessee fairly conceded that the common issue relating to disallowance u/s 43B for delay in depositing employee’s provident fund is squarely covered against the assessee by the judgment of Hon'ble jurisdictional Hig…