CIT v. Nipso Polyfabriks Ltd.

350 ITR 327High Court2013#165 most cited

What is CIT v. Nipso Polyfabriks Ltd. authority for?

Deduction for employee contributions to EPF/ESI is allowable under section 43B if paid before the due date for filing the return of income under section 139(1), irrespective of the due dates under the respective welfare fund statutes.

425

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Nipso Polyfabriks Ltd. · 350 ITR 327 · Section 43B · Section 36(1)(va) · Section 139(1) · EPF ESI deduction · employee contribution · due date payment · Himachal Pradesh High Court · Provident Fund · Employees’ State Insurance

Sections most often in play

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Issues it is cited on

section 158besection 113section 92fclarificatory amendmentretrospective amendmentsection 158bbsection 158bsection 36(1)(va)section 158section 43bsection 132asection 36(1)

Judgments citing CIT v. Nipso Polyfabriks Ltd.

CHATTISGARH DISTILLERIES LTD, KOLKATA,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 711/RPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur10 Apr 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.711/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20 Chhattisgarh Distilleries Limited 6B Express Tower, 42A, Shakespeare Sarani, Theater Road, Kolkata-700 017 Pan: Aaacs5073L

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 3Section 36(1)(va)

…favour of the assessees relying on Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd. 368 ITR 769 (Bom) which followed the decision of Hon'ble Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Nipso Polyfabrics Ltd. (2013) 350 ITR 327 (HP). In the legal jurisprudence interpreting the provisions of sec. 30(1)(va) and section 43B of the Act, there has been a division of opinion on the issue where the Hon'ble High Courts of Bombay, Himachal Pradesh, Calcutta, Gauhati and Delhi have interpreted the provisions beneficial to the assessee while the Hon'ble High Courts of Kerala and G…

KAY SWITCGEARS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KAPURTHALA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA 192/Asr/2022 is

ITA 24/ASR/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Apr 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.23/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Ess Ess Kay Engineering Co. Vs. Nfac, Delhi/C/O Asstt. Pvt. Ltd. Factory Area, Commissioner Of Income Jalandhar. Tax Circle-4, Jalandhar. [Pan: Aaace5057G] (Respondent) (Appellant)

Section 143(1)Section 250oSection 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…f Puri Brothers vs ACIT, Circle Palampur for the Asstt. year 2018-19, copy of the decision is annexed, wherein worthy CIT, NFAC, following the orders of the jurisdictional Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT VS Nipso Polyfabriks Limited reported in 350 ITR 327 (HP), have duly allowed relief for such EPF/ESI paid u/s 43B of the Act before filing of the Return of Income u/s 139(1) of the Act.” 8. The ld. Sr. DR vehemently argued and relied on the order of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Checkmate Services P. Ltd. vs. CIT, Civil Appeal No. 2833/2016 dated 12.10.2022 (2022) 143 Taxmann.com 178 (SC). 9. We heard…

ESS ESS KAY ENGINEERING COMPAY PRIVATE LIMITED ,KAPURTHALA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA 192/Asr/2022 is

ITA 23/ASR/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Apr 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.23/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Ess Ess Kay Engineering Co. Vs. Nfac, Delhi/C/O Asstt. Pvt. Ltd. Factory Area, Commissioner Of Income Jalandhar. Tax Circle-4, Jalandhar. [Pan: Aaace5057G] (Respondent) (Appellant)

Section 143(1)Section 250oSection 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…f Puri Brothers vs ACIT, Circle Palampur for the Asstt. year 2018-19, copy of the decision is annexed, wherein worthy CIT, NFAC, following the orders of the jurisdictional Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT VS Nipso Polyfabriks Limited reported in 350 ITR 327 (HP), have duly allowed relief for such EPF/ESI paid u/s 43B of the Act before filing of the Return of Income u/s 139(1) of the Act.” 8. The ld. Sr. DR vehemently argued and relied on the order of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Checkmate Services P. Ltd. vs. CIT, Civil Appeal No. 2833/2016 dated 12.10.2022 (2022) 143 Taxmann.com 178 (SC). 9. We heard…

M. K HOTEL & RESORTS LIMITED,AMRITSAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA 192/Asr/2022 is

ITA 14/ASR/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Apr 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.23/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Ess Ess Kay Engineering Co. Vs. Nfac, Delhi/C/O Asstt. Pvt. Ltd. Factory Area, Commissioner Of Income Jalandhar. Tax Circle-4, Jalandhar. [Pan: Aaace5057G] (Respondent) (Appellant)

Section 143(1)Section 250oSection 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…f Puri Brothers vs ACIT, Circle Palampur for the Asstt. year 2018-19, copy of the decision is annexed, wherein worthy CIT, NFAC, following the orders of the jurisdictional Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT VS Nipso Polyfabriks Limited reported in 350 ITR 327 (HP), have duly allowed relief for such EPF/ESI paid u/s 43B of the Act before filing of the Return of Income u/s 139(1) of the Act.” 8. The ld. Sr. DR vehemently argued and relied on the order of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Checkmate Services P. Ltd. vs. CIT, Civil Appeal No. 2833/2016 dated 12.10.2022 (2022) 143 Taxmann.com 178 (SC). 9. We heard…

M/S. SURESH ELECTRICALS,BELLARY vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 724/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanassessment Year : 2018-19 M/S. Suresh Electricals, Vs. Dcit, Ward No.25, Cmc T. S. No.227, Tilak Cpc, Nagar, Khb Colony, Bengaluru. Bellary – 583 101. Pan : Abyfs 9751 M Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. B. S. Balachandran, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel Date Of Hearing : 23.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.11.2022 O R D E R This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Nfac, Delhi, Dated 12.07.2022, Relating To Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Only Issue That Arises For Consideration In This Appeal Is As To Whether The Revenue Authorities Were Justified In Disallowing Payment Made To Esi/Pf Being Employees’ Share Of Contribution Under Section 36(1)(Va) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’). 3. In This Regard, It Is Pertinent To Note That The Employee Provident Fund & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 Was Promulgated To Provide For Such Institution Of Provident Funds, Pension Fund & Deposit-Linked Insurance Fund For Employees In Factories & Other Establishments. It Aims To Build Adequate Retirement Corpus For The Salaried Class Of Employees. The Fund Includes Contributions From The Employer & Employee Both, Page 2 Of 14

For Appellant: Shri. B. S. Balachandran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 2Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC - C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N. V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT Assessment Year : 2018-19 M/s. Suresh Electricals, Vs. DCIT, Ward No.25, CMC T. S. No.227, Tilak CPC, Nagar, KHB Colony, Bengaluru. Bellary – 583 101. PAN : ABYFS 9751 M APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. B. S. Balachandran, Advocate Revenue by : Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel Date of hearing : 23.11.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 24.11.2022 O R D E R This is an appeal by the assessee directed against the order of NFAC, Delhi, dated 12.07.2022, relating to Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The only…

BHORUKA FABCONS PRIVATE LIMITED,MYSURU vs. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 910/BANG/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Nov 2022AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanassessment Year : 2020-21 M/S. Bhoruka Fabcons Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Director Of Income Tax, No.427E, Hebbal Industrial Area, Cpc, Mysuru – 570 016. Bengaluru. Pan : Aaccb 9377 N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Bhargava S. N, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel Date Of Hearing : 23.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.11.2022 O R D E R This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Nfac, Delhi, Dated 28.07.2022, Relating To Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. The Only Issue That Arises For Consideration In This Appeal Is As To Whether The Revenue Authorities Were Justified In Disallowing Payment Made To Esi/Pf Being Employees’ Share Of Contribution Under Section 36(1)(Va) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’). 3. In This Regard, It Is Pertinent To Note That The Employee Provident Fund & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 Was Promulgated To Provide For Such Institution Of Provident Funds, Pension Fund & Deposit-Linked Insurance Fund For Employees In Factories & Other Establishments. It Aims To Build Adequate Retirement Corpus For The Salaried Class Of Employees. The Fund Includes Contributions From The Employer & Employee Both, Calculated In The Prescribed Manner Under The Relevant Act. As Per Page 2 Of 13

For Appellant: Shri. Bhargava S. N, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 2Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC - C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N. V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT Assessment Year : 2020-21 M/s. Bhoruka Fabcons Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Director of Income Tax, No.427E, Hebbal Industrial Area, CPC, Mysuru – 570 016. Bengaluru. PAN : AACCB 9377 N APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. Bhargava S. N, CA Revenue by : Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel Date of hearing : 23.11.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 24.11.2022 O R D E R This is an appeal by the assessee directed against the order of NFAC, Delhi, dated 28.07.2022, relating to Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. The…

CHASE SECURITY,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(3)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 796/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanassessment Year : 2018-19 M/S. Chase Security, Vs. The Ito, No.16/A, 1St Floor, Millar Tank Bund Ward – 6(3)(1), Cpc, Road, Vasanth Nagar, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 052. Pan : Aaefc 2412 L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Smt. Sheethal Borkar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel Date Of Hearing : 21.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.11.2022 O R D E R This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Dated 29.04.2021 By The Nfac, Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Only Issue That Arises For Consideration In This Appeal Is As To Whether The Revenue Authorities Were Justified In Disallowing Payment Made To Esi/Pf Being Employees’ Share Of Contribution Under Section 36(1)(Va) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’). 3. In This Regard, It Is Pertinent To Note That The Employee Provident Fund & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 Was Promulgated To Provide For Such Institution Of Provident Funds, Pension Fund & Deposit-Linked Insurance Fund For Employees In Factories & Other Establishments. It Aims To Build Adequate Retirement Corpus For The Salaried Class Of Employees. The Fund Includes Contributions From The Employer & Employee Both, Page 2 Of 14

For Appellant: Smt. Sheethal Borkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 2Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC - C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N. V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT Assessment Year : 2018-19 M/s. Chase Security, Vs. The ITO, No.16/A, 1st Floor, Millar Tank Bund Ward – 6(3)(1), CPC, Road, Vasanth Nagar, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 052. PAN : AAEFC 2412 L APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Smt. Sheethal Borkar, Advocate Revenue by : Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel Date of hearing : 21.11.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 23.11.2022 O R D E R This is an appeal by the assessee directed against the order dated 29.04.2021 by the NFAC, Delhi relating to Assessment Year 201…

DATWYLER PHARMA PACKAGING I P LTD,SATARA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE, SATARA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 98/PUN/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 139(1)Section 30(1)(va)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…favour of the assessees relying on Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd. 368 ITR 769 (Bom) which followed the decision of Hon'ble Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Nipso Polyfabrics Ltd. (2013) 350 ITR 327 (HP). In the legal jurisprudence interpreting the provisions of sec. 30(1)(va) and section 43B of the Act, there has been a division of opinion on the issue where the Hon'ble High Courts of Bombay, Himachal Pradesh, Calcutta, Gauhati and Delhi have 3 ITA 98 of 2022 Datwyler Pharma Packaging (I) P.Ltd. A.Y. 2017-18 interpreted the provisions bene…

M/S LOKMANGAL MAULI INDUSTRIES LTD,SOLAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,CIRCLE -1, , SOLAPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 96/PUN/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 139(1)Section 30(1)(va)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…favour of the assessees relying on Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd. 368 ITR 769 (Bom) which followed the decision of Hon'ble Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Nipso Polyfabrics Ltd. (2013) 350 ITR 327 (HP). In the legal jurisprudence interpreting the provisions of sec. 30(1)(va) and section 43B of the Act, there has been a division of opinion on the issue where the Hon'ble 3 ITA 96 of 2022 Lokmangal Mauli Industries A.Y. 2017-18 High Courts of Bombay, Himachal Pradesh, Calcutta, Gauhati and Delhi have interpreted the provisions beneficial to…

AJIT ABDULMAJID MAHAT,KOLHAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 722/PUN/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Roao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 30(1)(va)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…favour of the assessees relying on Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd. 368 ITR 769 (Bom) which followed the decision of Hon'ble Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Nipso Polyfabrics Ltd. (2013) 350 ITR 327 (HP). In the legal jurisprudence interpreting the provisions of sec. 30(1)(va) and section 43B of the Act, there has been a division of opinion on the issue where the Hon'ble High Courts of Bombay, Himachal Pradesh, Calcutta, Gauhati and Delhi have interpreted the provisions beneficial to the assessee while the Hon'ble High Courts of Kerala 3 IT…

KOHINOOR DEVELOPMENTS CORPORATION,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX, CPC,, BENGALURU

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 719/PUN/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Nov 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

For Appellant: Shri V.L. Jain (through virtual)For Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 139(1)Section 30(1)(va)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…favour of the assessees relying on Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd. 368 ITR 769 (Bom) which followed the decision of Hon'ble Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Nipso Polyfabrics Ltd. (2013) 350 ITR 327 (HP). In the legal jurisprudence 3 ITA 718 & 719 of 2021 Kohinoor Developments Corpn. A.Y. 2018-19 & 2019-20 interpreting the provisions of sec. 30(1)(va) and section 43B of the Act, there has been a division of opinion on the issue where the Hon'ble High Courts of Bombay, Himachal Pradesh, Calcutta, Gauhati and Delhi have interpreted the provi…

KOHINOOR DEVELOPMENTS CORPORATION,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX, CPC,, BENGALURU

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 718/PUN/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

For Appellant: Shri V.L. Jain (through virtual)For Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 139(1)Section 30(1)(va)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…favour of the assessees relying on Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd. 368 ITR 769 (Bom) which followed the decision of Hon'ble Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Nipso Polyfabrics Ltd. (2013) 350 ITR 327 (HP). In the legal jurisprudence 3 ITA 718 & 719 of 2021 Kohinoor Developments Corpn. A.Y. 2018-19 & 2019-20 interpreting the provisions of sec. 30(1)(va) and section 43B of the Act, there has been a division of opinion on the issue where the Hon'ble High Courts of Bombay, Himachal Pradesh, Calcutta, Gauhati and Delhi have interpreted the provi…

CC ENGINEERS PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1),, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 698/PUN/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Roao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Puranik (through virtual)For Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 30(1)(va)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…favour of the assessees relying on Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd. 368 ITR 769 (Bom) which followed the decision of Hon'ble Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Nipso Polyfabrics Ltd. (2013) 350 ITR 327 (HP). In the legal jurisprudence interpreting the provisions of sec. 30(1)(va) and section 43B of the Act, there has been a division of opinion on the issue where the Hon'ble High Courts of Bombay, Himachal Pradesh, Calcutta, Gauhati and Delhi have interpreted the 3 ITA 698/PUN/2021 CC Engineers Pvt. Ltd. A.Y. A.Y. 2018-19 provisions beneficial…

CHECKMATE SERVICES P LTD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I

C.A. No.-002833-002833 - 2016Supreme Court12 Oct 2022

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

Section 2Section 2(24)(x)Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…e Kerala High Court, focusing 12 Commissioner of Income Tax V. State Bank of Bikaner, (2014) 363 ITR 70. 13 Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, (2014) 366 ITR 408. 14 Commissioner of Income Tax v. Nipso Polyfabriks Ltd., (2013) 350 ITR 327. 15 Commissioner of Income Tax v. Merchem Ltd., ITA No. 402/2009. 10 only on Section 36(1)(va) is contrary to what Parliament intend. It was argued by learned counsel that Alom Extrusions correctly found that the law hindered and caused practical difficulties to assesses; as a result, it was omitted. To give full effect to the omis…

YOGESH NATWARLAL DOSHI,SATARA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC, BENGALURU

ITA 630/PUN/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Oct 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri G.D. Padmahshali, Am

For Appellant: Mrs. J.R. ChandekarFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kumar Singh Yadav
Section 139(1)Section 250Section 3Section 43B

…p before this Tribunal in the case of Prashant Arun Sangai (supra) wherein the Tribunal decided the similar issue in favour of the assessee relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT vs. Nipso Polyfabriks Ltd. (2013) 350 ITR 327 (HP). The relevant paragraphs of the said decision of the Tribunal (supra) are extracted herein under :- “4. We have heard the ld. DR and gone through the relevant material on record. There is no appearance from the side of the assessee despite notice. We are, therefore, proceeding to dispose of the appeal ex parte qua the assessee on merits. 5.…

YOGESH NATWARLAL DOSHI,SATARA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC, BENGALURU

ITA 629/PUN/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Oct 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri G.D. Padmahshali, Am

For Appellant: Mrs. J.R. ChandekarFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kumar Singh Yadav
Section 139(1)Section 250Section 3Section 43B

…p before this Tribunal in the case of Prashant Arun Sangai (supra) wherein the Tribunal decided the similar issue in favour of the assessee relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT vs. Nipso Polyfabriks Ltd. (2013) 350 ITR 327 (HP). The relevant paragraphs of the said decision of the Tribunal (supra) are extracted herein under :- “4. We have heard the ld. DR and gone through the relevant material on record. There is no appearance from the side of the assessee despite notice. We are, therefore, proceeding to dispose of the appeal ex parte qua the assessee on merits. 5.…

S J CONTRACTS P LTD,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), , PUNE

ITA 627/PUN/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Oct 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri G.D. Padmahshali, Am

For Appellant: Shri C.H. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kusmar Singh Yadav
Section 139(1)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…p before this Tribunal in the case of Prashant Arun Sangai (supra) wherein the Tribunal decided the similar issue in favour of the assessee relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT vs. Nipso Polyfabriks Ltd. (2013) 350 ITR 327 (HP). The relevant paragraphs of the said decision of the Tribunal (supra) are extracted herein under :- “4. We have heard the ld. DR and gone through the relevant material on record. There is no appearance from the side of the assessee despite notice. We are, therefore, proceeding to dispose of the appeal ex parte qua the assessee on merits. 5.…

S J CONTRACTS P LTD,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), , PUNE

ITA 626/PUN/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Oct 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri G.D. Padmahshali, Am

For Appellant: Shri C.H. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kusmar Singh Yadav
Section 139(1)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…p before this Tribunal in the case of Prashant Arun Sangai (supra) wherein the Tribunal decided the similar issue in favour of the assessee relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT vs. Nipso Polyfabriks Ltd. (2013) 350 ITR 327 (HP). The relevant paragraphs of the said decision of the Tribunal (supra) are extracted herein under :- “4. We have heard the ld. DR and gone through the relevant material on record. There is no appearance from the side of the assessee despite notice. We are, therefore, proceeding to dispose of the appeal ex parte qua the assessee on merits. 5.…

MR SUNIL SHAMRAO PATIL,SOLAPUR vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 624/PUN/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Oct 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri G.D. Padmahshali, Am

For Appellant: Shri Piyush Bafna (through virtual)For Respondent: Shri Piyush Kumar Singh Yadav (through physiclal)
Section 139(1)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…p before this Tribunal in the case of Prashant Arun Sangai (supra) wherein the Tribunal decided the similar issue in favour of the assessee relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT vs. Nipso Polyfabriks Ltd. (2013) 350 ITR 327 (HP). The relevant paragraphs of the said decision of the Tribunal (supra) are extracted herein under :- “4. We have heard the ld. DR and gone through the relevant material on record. There is no appearance from the side of the assessee despite notice. We are, therefore, proceeding to dispose of the appeal ex parte qua the assessee on merits. 5.…

PRAKASH DHONDIRAM KOLI,KOLHAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC,, BENGALURU

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 621/PUN/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Oct 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri G.D. Padmahshali, Am

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri M.G. Jasnani
Section 139(1)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…p before this Tribunal in the case of Prashant Arun Sangai (supra) wherein the Tribunal decided the similar issue in favour of the assessee relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT vs. Nipso Polyfabriks Ltd. (2013) 350 ITR 327 (HP). The relevant paragraphs of the said decision of the Tribunal (supra) are extracted herein under :- “4. We have heard the ld. DR and gone through the relevant material on record. There is no appearance from the side of the assessee despite notice. We are, therefore, proceeding to dispose of the appeal ex parte qua the assessee on merits. 5.…

Showing 1–20 of 425 · Page 1 of 22

...