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

101 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Gujrat State Road Transport Corporation (265 CTR 64), spanning 2017 to 2025.

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

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 2(24)(x), Section 271(1)(c), Section 43B.

CIT v. Gujrat State Road Transport Corporation

265 CTR 64High Court2014#1087 most cited

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

Employee contributions to provident fund and ESI are deductible only if deposited by the due date prescribed under the respective PF/ESI Acts, and not merely by the due date for filing the income tax return.

101

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Gujrat State Road Transport Corporation · Section 43B · Section 36(1)(va) · employees' contribution · provident fund deduction · ESI deduction · due date for deposit · PF ESI payment · Income Tax Act · Section 2(24)(x) · Section 271(1)(c)

Sections most often in play

Section 2(24)(x)Section 271(1)(c)Section 43B

Judgments citing CIT v. Gujrat State Road Transport Corporation

Bharat Security Agency, Kolkata vs. Assessing Officer, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 298/KOL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Dec 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap(Kz) &Shri A. T. Varkey]

Section 139Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…es contribution is to be paid within the due date of payment as prescribed in the respective Acts (PF/ESI Act) to claim deduction. The AO took note of the decision of the Hon’bleGujrat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Gujrat State Road Transport Corporation [265 CTR 64] and the case of LKP Securities Ltd. passed by the ITAT Mumbai wherein it was held that employees’ contribution can be allowed only if the same is deposited within the due date prescribed under the respective Act’s and not within the due date of filing return of income. And the AO cited the CBDT Circular No. 22/2015 dated 17.12.2015 for disallowin…

Vani Constructions, Visakhapatnam vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Visakhapatnam

The appeal of the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 83/VIZ/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam20 Sept 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Choudhry, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri I.Kama Sastry, FCAFor Respondent: Shri V. Srinivasa Rao, Sr.DR

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 263Section 36(1)(va)

…of Rs. 1,34,401/- u/sec. 2(24)(x) of the Act to the income already assessed in the assessment order, while relying upon the judgment of the Hon'ble (M/s. Vani Constructions) Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (265 CTR 64) wherein it was held that when the Assessee has not deposited the employees contribution in the PF account before the due date provided under the PF Act and/or ESI Act, the Assessee shall not be entitled to deduction u/sec. 36(1)(va) of the Act, though the Assessee might have deposited employees contribution on or before due date of filing of the…

Rasna Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-3(1)(2), Ahmedabad

Appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 2870/AHD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Aug 2021AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri P.F. Jain, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. Shyam Prasad, Sr. D.R

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)

…ilar facts has been adjudicated by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court of Gujarat in the case of Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation. We consider that the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation 265 CTR 64 has held that when the employer has not credited the sum received by it as employees contribution to employees account in relevant fund on or before the due date as prescribed in explanation to section 36(i)(va) the assessee shall not be entitled to deduction. In view of the above, facts and judicial findings, we uphold the decision of ld. CIT(A).…

M/S. Rasna Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Circle-3(1)(2), Ahmedabad

Appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 1528/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Aug 2021AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri P.F. Jain, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. Shyam Prasad, Sr. D.R

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)

The DCIT, Circle-1, Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Anand Healthcare Ltd., Ahmedabad

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

ITA 2415/AHD/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Nov 2019AY 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri A.L. Thakkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri L.P. Jain, Sr. D.R

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 2(24)Section 36(1)(va)Section 68

…t assessee has made the payment before the due date of filing of return of income. We find that the decision ld. CIT(A) is not correct considering the finding of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation 265 CTR 64 wherein, it is held that when the employer has not credited the sum received by it as employees contribution to employees account in relevant fund on or before due date as prescribed in explanation to section 36(1)(va), the asssessee shall not be entitled to deduction of such amount though he I.T.A No. 2415/Ahd/2013 A.Y. 2007-08 Page No 6 DCIT vs…

Rankas Texfab Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. DCIT Circle, Ward 3(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 483/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vidhyut Trivedi, Sr. D.R

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43

…ot filed any application for condonation of delay in filing the instant appeal, therefore, this appeal is not maintainable. On merit also, it is noticed that the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation 265 CTR 64 has held that when the employer has not credited the sum received by it as employee’s contribution to employee’s account in relevant fund on or before due date as prescribed in explanation to section 36(1)(va), the assessee is not entitled to deduction on such amount though he deposited the said sum before the due date prescribed u/s. 43(b) i.e. p…

Tax Tech India Pvt.Ltd., Gandhinagar vs. The DCIT, Gandhinagar Circle, Gandhinagar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1770/AHD/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Oct 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad&Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1770/Ahd/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Tax Tech India Pvt. Ltd. Dy. Cit बनाम/ Gandhinagar Circle Kh-0 North Star Building, Vs. 4Th Floor, Block No. 14 Sargashan Corss Road, Udyog Bhavan, Sector-11 Sarkhej Gandhinagar Gandhinagar Highway, Gandhinagar "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aab Ct8 854 B .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Mudit Nagpal, Sr. DRFor Respondent: 16/09/2019

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

…ution received from the employees under Provident Fund and ESI within the due date as prescribed in the Provident Fund Act and ESI Act. We consider that the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation 265 CTR 64 has held that when the employer has not credited the sum received by it as employees’ contribution to employees account in the relevant fund on or before the due date prescribed in Explanation to Sec. 36(i)(va) the assessee shall not be entitled to deduction. In view of the above facts and judicial findings we uphold the decision of Ld. CIT(A). Ac…

Max Vigil Securities Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1157/AHD/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Aug 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad&Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1157/Ahd/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Max Vigil Securities Pvt. Ltd. Acit बनाम/ Circle-2(1)(2), 42, Astha Complex, Opp. R.T.O., Vs. Navjivan Trust Building, Subhas Bridge, B/H. Gujarat Vidyapith, Ahmedabad- 380027 Off Ashram Road, Ahmedabad- 380009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaf Cm0 319 Q .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Mudit Nagpal, Sr. DRFor Respondent: 29/07/2019

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

…ived from the employees under the Provident Fund Act and the ESI Act within the due date as prescribed under the Provident Fund and the ESI Act amounting to Rs. 2,32,54,401/-. We consider that the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. GSRTC 265 CTR 64 has held that when the employer has not credited the sum received by it as employees’ contribution to employees account in relevant fund on or before due date as prescribed in explanation to Sec. 36(1)(va) the assessee shall not be entitled to deduction. In view of the above facts and the judicial findings we upheld the decision of Ld. CIT(A). The…

Chipco Bonding Systems India Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. ITO, Ward-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad

ITA 2777/AHD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jul 2019AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri C.N. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Santosh Karnani, Sr. D.R

Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43

…provident fund act and the ESI Act within the due dates as prescribed under the provident Fund Act and the ESI Act amounting to Rs. 5,71,684/-. We consider that Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation 265 CTR 64 has held that when the employer has not credited the sum received by it as employees contribution to employee’s account in relevant fund on or before due date as prescribed in explanation to section 36(i)(va) the assessee shall I.T.A No. 2777/Ahd/2017 A.Y. 2014-15 Page No 5 Chipco Bonding Systems India Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO not be entitled to deducti…

A. Menarini India Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. CIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2199/AHD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 May 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad&Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2199/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2014-15) A. Menarini India Pvt. Ltd. Dcit बनाम/ Circle- 1(1)(1), A-101, Shapath Iv, Vs. Ahmedabad Near Karnavati Club, S.G. Highway, Ahmedabad- 380015 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaa Ci9 822 K .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Kamlesh Makwona, Sr. DRFor Respondent: 10/05/2019

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(v)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…fied in the respective Act should be added to the total income of the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A) has also placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation reported in 265 CTR 64 (Guj) wherein it is held that were the employer has not credited the sum received by it as employees’ contribution to employees account in relevant fund on or before due date as prescribed in explanation to sec. 36(1)(va) the assessee shall not be entitled to deduction of such amount though it deposit the said sum before the due date prescribed u/…

M/S. Umiya Automobiles, Mehsana vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Mehsana Circle, Mehsana

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

ITA 1252/AHD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Apr 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad)

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Somogyan Pal, Sr. D.R

Section 36(1)(va)

…ground no. 2, there is not dispute that contribution of employees to the tune of Rs. 47,171/- was not deposited on time before the due date and in these circumstances, Hon’ble Gujarat High Court is against the appellant wherein in the matter of CIT vs. GSRTC 265 CTR 64 (Guj.) wherein it is held that if Employees' Contribution towards PF and ESIC are not deposited within time limit provided in the respective Acts, i.e. Provident Fund and ESI Act, then deduction will not be admissible to the assessee. Hence, respectfully following the decision of Hon’ble High Court cited (supra), we do not find any merit in the gr…

M/S. Suvarnakala Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-8, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1876/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Smt. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1876/Ahd/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) M/S. Suvarnakala Pvt. Dcit बनाम/ Cir-8, Ltd. Vs. Ahmedabad 101-Ff, National Plaza, C G Road, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad- 380006 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aae Cs7 337 K .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shodhan, ARsFor Respondent: 07/03/2019

Section 143(2)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘B’ अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SMT. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1876/Ahd/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) M/s. Suvarnakala Pvt. DCIT बनाम/ Cir-8, Ltd. Vs. Ahmedabad 101-FF, National Plaza, C G Road, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad- 380006 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAE CS7 337 K .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) S.N. Sopankar & Urvashi अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant by : Shodhan, ARs Mudit Nagpal, Sr. DR ""यथ" क" ओर से / Respondent by…

Rmp Bearings Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is rejected

ITA 3401/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Nov 2018AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri P.M. Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Mudit Nagpal, Sr. D.R

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B

…Act. The provisions of section 43B are applicable in respect of employees contribution and in this context it is different from the provisions of sec.36(1 )(va); The Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT vs Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation 265 CTR 64 have held that when the employer has not credited the sum received by it as employees contribution to employees account in relevant fund on or before due date as prescribed in explanation to section 36(1)(va), the assessee shall not be entitled to deduction of such amount though he deposits the said sum before the due date prescribed u/s,43B, i.e.…

Shiva Industrial Security Agency Gujarat Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(2), Surat

In the result, ITA No.2527/Ahd/2017 is allowed, and ITA

ITA 2528/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Nov 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Nirmal Somani, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Smitha V. Nair, Sr.DR

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 36Section 36(1)(v)Section 40

…respective PF and ESCI Acts. Thus, the ld.AO disallowed the claim of the assessee. On appeal, the ld.CIT(A) has confirmed the disallowance by following judgment of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Gujarat State Road Transportation Corporation, 265 CTR 64. 8. With the assistance of the ld.representatives, we have gone through the record carefully. The ld.counsel for the assessee ITA No.2527 AND 2528/Ahd/2015 5 contended that Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Pr.CIT Vs. Rajasthan State Beverages Corpn. Ltd., 84 taxmann.com 185 (SC) has allowed deduction of such payment, if the payments we…

Shiva Industrial Security Agency Gujarat Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. The ACIT, Circle-4, Surat

In the result, ITA No.2527/Ahd/2017 is allowed, and ITA

ITA 2527/AHD/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Nov 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Nirmal Somani, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Smitha V. Nair, Sr.DR

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 36Section 36(1)(v)Section 40

M/S. Umiya Automobiles, Mehsana vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Mehsana Circle, Mehsana

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2740/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Aug 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.2740/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Mehul S. Thakker, ARFor Respondent: Ms.Apoorva Bhardwaja, Sr.DR

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ - अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD – BENCH ‘A’ BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.2740/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s.Umiya Automobiles ACIT, Mehsana Cir. State Highway, Nagalpur Vs Mehsana. Mehsana 384 002. अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Mehul S. Thakker, AR Revenue by : Ms.Apoorva Bhardwaja, Sr.DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 06/08/2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement : 31/08/2018 O R D E R PER RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL…

Sthapati Architecture and Interiors Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 2361/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Mahavir Prasadआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2361/Ahd/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) Sthapati Architecture & Dcit, बनाम/ Interiors Pvt. Ltd., Circle – 8, Vs. 502, New York Plaza, Ahmedabad. Opp. Judges Bunglow, Satellite, Ahmedabad – 380015 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aahcs 8758 F .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Shri Sakar Sharma, C.A. अपीलाथ" ओर से / Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri T. Sankar, Sr. D.R.

For Respondent: Shri T. Sankar, Sr. D.R

Section 194JSection 201Section 32Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 40Section 43B

…the provident fund account beyond the due dates as prescribed in the P.F. Act. Similarly, there has been delayed payment w.r.t. ESIC. After decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation reported in 265 CTR 64 (Guj.) the factual legal position has changed. In this case Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat held that the provisions of section 43B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') do not apply to "employees' contribution to ESI/PF" and the deduction in respect of the same is allowable only if such contribution is deposited within the 'due date' specified in…

Sterling Addlife India Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Circle-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, this ground of appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2479/AHD/2017[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 May 2018AY 2013-2014

Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 271CSection 36Section 36(1)(va)

…on received from the employees within the due dates as stipulated under the provident Fund Act and the ESI Act amounting to Rs. 2,92,825/-. We consider that that Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation 265 CTR 64 has held that when the employer has not credited the sum received by it as employees contribution to employees account in relevant fund on or before due date as prescribed in explanation to section 36(i)(va) the assessee shall not be entitled to deduction. In view of the above facts and the judicial findings, we uphold the decision of Ld. CIT (A).…

M/S. Suzlon Structures Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. CIT, Circle-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, this ground of appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2348/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 May 2018AY 2013-14

Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 271CSection 36Section 36(1)(va)

M/S. Radix Web, Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT., Circle-5(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, this ground of appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2051/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 May 2018AY 2013-14

Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 271CSection 36Section 36(1)(va)