CIT v. Merchant

280 CTR 381High Court2015#1662 most cited

What is CIT v. Merchant authority for?

The scope of Section 43B and Section 36(1)(va) of the Income Tax Act are distinct, meaning they cannot be read together to determine an assessee's entitlement to a deduction for belatedly paid employee contributions.

68

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2021 to 2024.

Also referred to as

CIT vs Merchant · section 43B · section 36(1)(va) · employee contribution · deduction · belated payment · employer · due date · Income Tax Act 1961

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 68 of the Income Tax ActSection 139(9) of the ActSection 143(1) of the Income Tax ActSection 143(2) of the Income Tax ActSection 143(3) of the ActSection 18 of the Limitation ActSection 19 of the Limitation Act

Issues it is cited on

sundry creditorssection 68transfercompanyindiadocumentbusiness

Judgments citing CIT v. Merchant

East India Security Service, Kolkata vs. CPC, Banglore

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 455/KOL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Dec 2021AY 2019-20

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

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

…e ITR. The appellant has quoted a number of judgments in his favour. However it is seen that the Hon’bleGujrat High Court in CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (2014) 366 ITR 170 (Guj) and the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in CIT vs. Merchant (2015) 280 CTR 381 (Ker) have clearly held that the scope of section 43B and Section 36(1)(va) are different and thus, there is no question of reading both the provisions together to consider whether the assessee is entitled to deduction in respect of the sum belated by paid towards such contribution, especially, when such sums are received by the assessee (employe…

East India Security Service Service, Kolkata vs. CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 454/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

…e ITR. The appellant has quoted a number of judgments in his favour. However it is seen that the Hon’bleGujrat High Court in CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (2014) 366 ITR 170 (Guj) and the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in CIT vs. Merchant (2015) 280 CTR 381 (Ker) have clearly held that the scope of section 43B and Section 36(1)(va) are different and thus, there is no question of reading both the provisions together to consider whether the assessee is entitled to deduction in respect of the sum belated by paid towards such contribution, especially, when such sums are received by the assessee (employe…

Machine Tools India Ltd, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir. 2(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 407/KOL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Dec 2021AY 2019-20

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

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

…e ITR. The appellant has quoted a number of judgments in his favour. However it is seen that the Hon’bleGujrat High Court in CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (2014) 366 ITR 170 (Guj) and the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in CIT vs. Merchant (2015) 280 CTR 381 (Ker) have clearly held that the scope of section 43B and Section 36(1)(va) are different and thus, there is no question of reading both the provisions together to consider whether the assessee is entitled to deduction in respect of the sum belated by paid towards such contribution, especially, when such sums are received by the assessee (employe…

Machine Tools India Ltd, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir. 2(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 406/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

…e ITR. The appellant has quoted a number of judgments in his favour. However it is seen that the Hon’bleGujrat High Court in CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (2014) 366 ITR 170 (Guj) and the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in CIT vs. Merchant (2015) 280 CTR 381 (Ker) have clearly held that the scope of section 43B and Section 36(1)(va) are different and thus, there is no question of reading both the provisions together to consider whether the assessee is entitled to deduction in respect of the sum belated by paid towards such contribution, especially, when such sums are received by the assessee (employe…

Machine Tools India Ltd, Kolkata vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Cir. 2(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 405/KOL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Dec 2021AY 2017-18

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

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

…e ITR. The appellant has quoted a number of judgments in his favour. However it is seen that the Hon’bleGujrat High Court in CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (2014) 366 ITR 170 (Guj) and the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in CIT vs. Merchant (2015) 280 CTR 381 (Ker) have clearly held that the scope of section 43B and Section 36(1)(va) are different and thus, there is no question of reading both the provisions together to consider whether the assessee is entitled to deduction in respect of the sum belated by paid towards such contribution, especially, when such sums are received by the assessee (employe…

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

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 299/KOL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Dec 2021AY 2019-20

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

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

…e ITR. The appellant has quoted a number of judgments in his favour. However it is seen that the Hon’bleGujrat High Court in CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (2014) 366 ITR 170 (Guj) and the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in CIT vs. Merchant (2015) 280 CTR 381 (Ker) have clearly held that the scope of section 43B and Section 36(1)(va) are different and thus, there is no question of reading both the A.Ys 2018-19 & 2019-20 M/s.Bharat Security Agency provisions together to consider whether the assessee is entitled to deduction in respect of the sum belated by paid towards such contribution, especially, wh…

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

…e ITR. The appellant has quoted a number of judgments in his favour. However it is seen that the Hon’bleGujrat High Court in CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (2014) 366 ITR 170 (Guj) and the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in CIT vs. Merchant (2015) 280 CTR 381 (Ker) have clearly held that the scope of section 43B and Section 36(1)(va) are different and thus, there is no question of reading both the A.Ys 2018-19 & 2019-20 M/s.Bharat Security Agency provisions together to consider whether the assessee is entitled to deduction in respect of the sum belated by paid towards such contribution, especially, wh…

M/S Hari Oil Mills Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 3(1), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is disposed off in light of aforesaid directions

ITA 59/JPR/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Sept 2021AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (JCIT) a
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…tment and reliance on the decision of Jodhpur Benches of the Tribunal, it was submitted that the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in CIT vs Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (2014) 366 ITR 170 (Guj) and the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in CIT Vs Merchant (2015) 280 CTR 381 (Ker) have held that the scope of section 43B and section 36(1)(va) are different and thus, there is no question of reading both the provisions together to consider whether the assessee is entitled to deduction in respect of the sum belatedly paid towards such contribution, especially, when such sums received by the assessee (employer) from his e…