CIT v. Hindustan Organic Chemicals Limited

I.T.O.-6(3)(4), Mumbai vs. M/S. Khandelwal Laboratories P.Ltd., Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am Income Tax Officer, 6(3)(4) Vs. M/S. Khandelwal Laboratories R.No.524, 5Th Floor Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan 79/78, D Lal Path M.K.Road, Chinchpokli Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 033 Pan/Gir No.Aaack4225E (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

…e the due date of filing of return of income and hence, by respectfully following the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ghatge Patel Transport Ltd reported in 368 ITR 749, CIT vs. Hindustan Organic Chemicals Ltd. reported in 366 ITR 1 and DCIT vs Hind Filter Ltd., reported in 90 Taxman.com 51, the ld. CIT(A) had deleted the disallowance made u/s. u/s.36(1)(va) r.w.s. 2(24)(x) of the Act in the sum of Rs.93,44,251/- which does not call any interference. Accordingly, ground No.2 raised by the revenue is dismissed. 7. The last issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether th…

DCIT 15(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S.Freudenberg Performance Materials India Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh() & Shri G Manjunatha () Dy.Cit 15(1)(1), Mumbai Vs M/S Freudenberg Performance Materials India Ltd, 200, Sai Sampanna Bldg Station Road, Vikhroli (W) Mumbai-400 083 Pan : Aaacf1787G Appellant Respondednt M/S. Freudenberg Vs Dy.Cit 15(1)(1), Mumbai Performance Materials India Ltd, 200, Sai Sampanna Bldg Station Road, Vikhroli (W) Mumbai-400 083

…bution to PF & ESIC amounting to Rs.85,838 u/s 36(1)(viia) r.w.s. 2(24)(x) of the I.T. Act, 1961. We find that this issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs Hindustan Organics Chemical Ltd 366 ITR 1 (Bom) where it was held that section 43B is not applicable to payments made beyond the due date specified under respective Acts, if such payments have been made on or before due date of filing return of income. We further noted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Alom Extrusions Ltd 319 ITR 306 (SC) had considered an identical issue an…

DCIT -CC7(3), Mumbai vs. Kisan Moulding Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri G Manjunatha () & Shri Ravish Sood () Dcit, Cent.Cir.7(3), Mumbai Vs M/S Kisan Moulding Ltd K-Wing, 3Rd Floor, Tax Centre, 26A, Chandivali Road, Andheri(E), Mkumbai- 72 Pan :Aacck0640D Appellant Respondednt

…ter considering relevant submissions of the assessee and also by relying upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Alom Extrusions Ltd (supra) and the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs Hindustan Organics Ltd 366 ITR 1 (Bom) deleted addition made by the AO towards disallowance of employees’contribution to provident fund for delayed payment of such fund within the due date prescribed under the provisions of the employees provident fund & miscellaneous Act. The relevant findings of the Ld.CIT(A) are as under:- “The submissions filed by the Ld. Counsel are carefu…

Herrenknecht India P.Ltd, Chennai vs. DCIT Cir 1(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Sood

…enknecht India Pvt. Ltd. legislations by delaying the payment of contributions to the welfare funds. 12. Mr. Naniwadekar also relied upon the judgment dated July 11, 2014, in Income Tax Appeal No. 399 of 2012 (CIT v. Hindustan Organics Chemicals Ltd. [2014] 366 ITR 1 (Bom) passed by this court, to which one of us (S. C. Dharmadhikari J.) was a party where the following two issues of law were raised (page 3) : "(A) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal, in law, was right in allowing the claim of the assessee on account of delayed payments of P. F. of the employees' contributio…

ACIT 13(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Sodexo Food Solutions India P. Ltd, Mumbai

Appeal stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.5781/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Assistant Commissioner Of Sodexo Food Solutions India Income Tax-13(2)(1) Private Limited बनाम/ 1Stfloor, Gemstar Commercial Complex Room No.146, 1St Floor Vs. Ramchandra Lane Extension Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road Kanchpada, Malad(W) Mumbai -400 020 Mumbai-400 064 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaacr-2547-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.5707/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Sodexo Food Solutions India Assistant Commissioner Of Private Limited Income Tax-13(2)(1) बनाम/ 1Stfloor, Gemstar Commercial Complex Room No.146, 1St Floor Ramchandra Lane Extension Vs. Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road Kanchpada, Malad(W) Mumbai -400 020 Mumbai-400 064 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaacr-2547-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

…ITA Nos.5781 & 5707/Mum/2016 Sodexo Food Solutions India Private Limited Assessment Year-2011-12 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “के” "ायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K” BENCH, MUMBAI "ी श""जीत दे,"ाियक सद" एवं "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल, लेखा सद" के सम"। BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JM AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.5781/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Assistant Commissioner of Sodexo Food Solutions India Income Tax-13(2)(1) Private Limited बनाम/ 1stFloor, Gemstar Commercial Complex Room No.146, 1st Floor Vs. Ramchandra Lane Extension Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road Kanchpada,…

Sodexo Food Solutions India P .Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 8(3), Mumbai

Appeal stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.5781/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Assistant Commissioner Of Sodexo Food Solutions India Income Tax-13(2)(1) Private Limited बनाम/ 1Stfloor, Gemstar Commercial Complex Room No.146, 1St Floor Vs. Ramchandra Lane Extension Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road Kanchpada, Malad(W) Mumbai -400 020 Mumbai-400 064 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaacr-2547-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.5707/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Sodexo Food Solutions India Assistant Commissioner Of Private Limited Income Tax-13(2)(1) बनाम/ 1Stfloor, Gemstar Commercial Complex Room No.146, 1St Floor Ramchandra Lane Extension Vs. Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road Kanchpada, Malad(W) Mumbai -400 020 Mumbai-400 064 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaacr-2547-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

…ITA Nos.5781 & 5707/Mum/2016 Sodexo Food Solutions India Private Limited Assessment Year-2011-12 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “के” "ायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K” BENCH, MUMBAI "ी श""जीत दे,"ाियक सद" एवं "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल, लेखा सद" के सम"। BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JM AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.5781/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Assistant Commissioner of Sodexo Food Solutions India Income Tax-13(2)(1) Private Limited बनाम/ 1stFloor, Gemstar Commercial Complex Room No.146, 1st Floor Vs. Ramchandra Lane Extension Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road Kanchpada,…

ITO 6(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Krystal Aviation Services P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kochar

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA no.1682/Mum./2017 (Assessment Year : 2012–13) Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Appellant Circle–6(3)(2), Mumbai v/s M/s. Krystal Aviation Services Pvt. Ltd. 15A/17, Krystal House, Shivaji Fort Co–Operative Society Ltd., Dunkan ……………. Respondent Causeway Road, Sion, Mumbai 400 022 PAN – AADCK1643H Revenue by : Shri Manoj Kumar Singh Assessee by : Shri A.K. Ghosh Date of Hearing – 21.08.2018 Date of Order – 29.08.2018 O R D E R PER SAKTIJIT DEY, J.M. Aforesaid a…

ACIT Cir. 6 (3) (2), Mumbai vs. Khandelwal Laboratories Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby ordered to be dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.6034/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Acit, Cir, 6(3)(2), R. No. बिधम/ M/S. Khandelwal 522, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Laboratories Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, 79/78, Lal Path, Mumbai-400020. Chinchpokli, Mumbai- 400033. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaack4225E (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Ram Tiwari (Sr. Ar) Assessee By: Shri Dhaval Shah सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 09.05.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 03.08.2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 20.07.2016 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -12, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2009- 10. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: - “1. "The Learned Cit(A) Has Grossly Erred On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case To Allow Relief To The Assesses By Relying Upon The Order Of The Itat Dated 23.06.2016, In The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The A.Y.2009-10

…306/185 Taxman 416 - Held, yes - Whether thus Tribunal was right in holding that payments thereof are subject to benefits of section and hence, deduction was allowable - Held, yes (Para 16} [in favour of assessee] the case of Hindustan Organic Chemicals Ltd.(366 ITR 1) Hon'ble Court as under:- "I Section 43B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 - business disallowance - Certain deductions to be allowed only on actual payment-[P^F] - A,Y. 2006-07- whether amendment to section 43B which came into force with effect from 1,4.2004 would apply in instant case Held, yes therefore Tribunal was hilly justified in deleting additio…

DCIT 15(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Techno Process Equipments (I) Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kochar

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA no.1312/Mum./2017 (Assessment Year : 2012–13) Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Appellant Circle–15(3)(1), Mumbai v/s M/s. Techno Process Equipments (I) Ltd. C/o M/s. Minhaz & Co., C.As 7/10, Botawala Building ……………. Respondent Opp. Horniman Circle, Fort Mumbai 400 023 PAN – AABCT2398C Revenue by : Shri Ram Tiwari Assessee by : Shri Minhazali N. Ladiwala Date of Hearing – 02.07.2018 Date of Order – 06.07.2018 O R D E R PER SAKTIJIT DEY, J.M. Aforesaid appeal by th…

DCIT 15(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Ray Projects P. Ltd, Powai

In the result, this appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm

…ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) held as under: 2.4.9 The submissions of the AR and the facts of the case have been considered in the light of the case laws relied upon. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Hindustan Organic Chemicals Ltd. (366 ITR 1) held that 43B disallowance not applicable to payments made beyond the due date in respect of employees' contribution to PF/ESIC as per provisions of section 36(1)(va). Further, the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Alom Extrusion Ltd. (319 ITR 306) held that provisions to section 43B by Finance Act, 2003 is with retrospective effect from 1.4.1998.…

Firstsource Solutions Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 11(4), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kochar

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA no.3094/Mum./2014 (Assessment Year : 2003–04) First Source Solutions Ltd. (Formerly Customer Asset India Private Limited) Mindspace, Paradigm Tower ……………. Appellant B Wing, 5th Floor, Link Road Malad (West), Mumbai 400 064 PAN – AABCC2014Q v/s Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Circle–11(4), Bangalore Revenue by : Shri Jayant Kumar Assessee by : Shri Ajit Kumar Jain a/w Shri Rahul Golecha and Shri Sagar Shah Date of Hearing – 06.04.2018 Date of Order –…

DCIT 12(2)(1), Mumbai vs. First Flight Couriers P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals for the AY 2011-12 and AY 2012-13 are dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dy. Commissioner Of M/S First Flight Couriers Pvt. Income Tax-12(2)(1), Room Vs. Ltd. G 1001/02, Lotus No. 223, 2Nd Floor, Aayakar Corporation Park, Off Jay Coach Bhavan, M.K. Road Flyover, Western Exp. Highway, Mumbai-400020. Graham Firth Steel Comp, Goregaon (East), Mumbai-400064. Pan No. Aaacf0841R (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Ms. Pooja Swaroop, Dr Assessee By : Mr. Brijmohan Pooranmal Agarwal, Ar Date Of Hearing : 05/04/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 26/04/2018

…e Revenue filed appeal before the ITAT against the said order of the Ld. CIT(A). The Tribunal upheld the order of the Ld. CIT(A), following the decision in CIT v. M/s Alom Etrusions Ltd. (2009) 319 ITR 306 (SC) and CIT v. M/s Hindustan Organics Chemicals Ltd. 366 ITR 1 (Bom). Facts being identical, we follow the said order of the Co-ordinate Bench in assessee’s own case for the AY 2011-12 and uphold the order of the Ld. CIT(A). Thus the 2nd ground of appeal is dismissed. 12. In the result, the appeal filed for the A.Y. 2011-12 is dismissed. M/s First Flight Couriers Pvt. Ltd. Assessment Year: 2012-13 13. The 1st…

Tiger Steel Engineering (India) P.Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT 10(3), Mumbai

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Ramit Kochar, Am Tiger Steel Engineering The Dy. Commissioner Of (India) Pvt. Ltd Income Tax Circle 15(3)(1), 4Th Floor, Bldg No. 5, Sector Dy. Commissioner Of Iii, Millennium Business Park, Income Tax 10(3), 4 Th Floor, Vs. Mahape, Navi Room No. 451, Aayakar Mumbai-400 710 Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 Appellant .. Respondent Pan No. Aaact2537J Assessee By : None Revenue By : V Justin, Dr

…d Maharashtra Labour Welfare Fund. For this assessee has raised following two grounds:- “1. The ld CIT(A) grossly erred in not taking the in to cognizance and not following the binding judgements of Bombay High Court in the case of Hindustan Organic Chemical 366 ITR 1, duly quoted the case of CIT vs. Gujarat Estate road transport corporation. 2. The ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the disallowance of ₹ 66,14,975/- on account of employee’s contribution to PF in respect of Murbad and Haridwar unit as well as Head Office ignoring the fact that the amount was duly paid by the appellant well before the “due date”…

Tokheim India Pvt. Ltd., Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir. - 10 (3), Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA no.2737/Mum./2016 (Assessment Year : 2010–11) M/s. Tokheim India Pvt. Ltd. A–174, TTC Industrial Area Kharine Village, MIDC ……………. Appellant Navi Mumbai 400 709 PAN – AACCK3414F v/s Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Circle–10(3), Mumbai ITA no.2668/Mum./2016 (Assessment Year : 2010–11) Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Appellant Circle–10(3), Mumbai v/s M/s. Tokheim India Pvt. Ltd. A–174, TTC Industrial Area Kharine Village, MIDC ……………. Respon…

Print House India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 10(3), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri G. Manjunatha

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “J” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA no.5798/Mum./2016 (Assessment Year : 2010–11) M/s. Print House India Pvt. Ltd. C/o Jayesh Sanghrajka & Co., C.A. LLP Unit no.405–408 ……………. Appellant Hind Rajasthan Centre D.S. Phalke road, Dadar (E) Mumbai 400 014 PAN–AAACM5669E v/s Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Circle–10(3), Mumbai Assessee by : Shri Amar Sanghvi a/w Ms. Manasi Shah Revenue by : Shri Ram Tiwari Date of Hearing – 02.11.2017 Date of Order – 10.11.2017 O R D E R PER SAKTIJIT DEY, J.…

DCIT, CC-2(3), Mumbai vs. Provogue (India) Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA no.1578/Mum./2015 (Assessment Year : 2009–10) Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Appellant Central Circle–2(3), Mumbai v/s M/s. Provogue India Ltd. 105/106, Provogue House Off. New Link Road ……………. Respondent Andheri (W), Mumbai 400 053 PAN – AABCA8524H ITA no.1584/Mum./2015 (Assessment Year : 2009–10) M/s. Provogue India Ltd. 105/106, Provogue House Off. New Link Road ……………. Appellant Andheri (W), Mumbai 400 053 PAN – AABCA8524H v/s Asstt. Commissioner of Inco…

DCIT 14(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Foods and Inns Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the cross objection of assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

…inay Cements 213 CTR 268 (SC) CO. No.87/Mum/2017 M/s.Foods and Inns Limited. (iii) Alom Extrusions Ltd. (2009) 309 ITR 306 (SC) (iv) Dharmendra Sharma 297 ITR 320 (Del.) (v) P.M.Electronics Ltd. 313 ITR 161 (Del.) (vi) CIT v. Hindustan Organics Chemicals Ltd. 366 ITR 1 (Bom.) (vii) CIT v. Bank of Rajasthan Ltd. 233 ITR 530 (Bom.) (viii) CIT v. Magus Customers Dialog Pvt.Ltd. 371 ITR 244 (Kar) 7.2 Considering the above, the learned CIT(A) deleted the addition. 7.3 Against the above order, the Revenue is in appeal before us. 8. We have heard both the Counsel and perused the records. We find that the case laws re…

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

Appeal stands allowed

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

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

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

Appeal stands allowed

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

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

Ray Engineering Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT-15(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for A

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Ram Lal Negim/S. Ray Engineering Ltd. Dy. C.I.T. 15(3)(1) Plot No. 2, Ray Compound Room No. 451, 4Th Floor Vs. Post Iit Market, Powai Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai 400076 Mumbai 400020 Pan – Aadcr3859C Appellant Respondent

…sue was covered in favour of the Appellant by the jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Hindustan Organic Chemicals Ltd. ITXA 399/12 dated 27-06- 2014, but instead relied on the decision in the case of CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation 366 ITR 170 (Guj.) 03. The Appellant craves leave to add amend or delete any of the grounds of appeal.” 3.2 All these grounds (supra) pertain to the single issue of challenging the order of the learned CIT(A) in upholding the disallowance of `28,70,807/- made by the Assessing Officer (AO) on account of delayed payment of contribution to EPF in accordance wit…