How many judgments cite CIT v. Noble and Hewitt (I) P. Ltd.?

109 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Noble and Hewitt (I) P. Ltd. (305 ITR 324), spanning 2015 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Noble and Hewitt (I) P. Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 43B, Section 250, Section 139(1), Section 143(1), Section 143(2), Section 143(3).

CIT v. Noble and Hewitt (I) P. Ltd.

305 ITR 324High Court2008#990 most cited

What is CIT v. Noble and Hewitt (I) P. Ltd. authority for?

Section 43B of the Income-tax Act does not apply to disallow an amount (such as statutory dues like service tax or GST) if it has not been debited to the Profit & Loss account and no deduction for it has been claimed by the assessee.

109

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Noble and Hewitt · 305 ITR 324 · Section 43B · disallowance of statutory dues · no deduction claimed · not debited to P&L account · service tax · GST · current liability · Delhi High Court

Also reported as

166 Taxmann 48

Sections most often in play

Section 43B Section 250 Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194A Section 201(1)

Issues it is cited on

statutory dues section 145a section 43b mercantile system of accounting section 43 section 36(1)(iii)section 36(1)(va)section 145 section 36(1)section 36 section 28 section 234b

Judgments citing CIT v. Noble and Hewitt (I) P. Ltd.

AHLUWALIA ERECTORS & FABRICATORS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOTA,KOTA vs. DCIT/ACIT CIR-2, KOTA

In the result the appeal of\nthe assessee in ITA no 199/JP/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 199/JPR/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Nov 2025AY 2022-23

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT

Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 250Section 43B

…nThough it was w.r.t. service tax yet applies for GST as well. The revenue not\nhaving challenged such finding, has attained finality. And will work as estoppel\nagainst the revenue.\n1.4 Supporting Case laws:\n1.4.1 CIT v. Noble & Hewitt (I) (P.) Ltd. (2008) 305 ITR 324 (Delhi HC) (DC 1-2)\nheld that,\n“In our opinion since the assessee did not debit the amount to the Profit & Loss Account\nas an expenditure nor did the assessee claim any deduction in respect of the amount\nand considering that the assessee is following the mercantile system of accounting, the\nquestion of disallowing the deduction not claimed w…

AHLUWALIA ERECTORS & FABRICATORS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOTA,KOTA vs. DCIT/ACIT CIR-2, KOTA, KOTA

In the result the appeal of\nthe assessee in ITA no 199/JP/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 198/JPR/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Nov 2025AY 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT

Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 250Section 43B

AHLUWALIA ERECTORS & FABRICATORS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOTA vs. DCIT/ACIT CIR-2, KOTA

In the result the appeal of\nthe assessee in ITA no 199/JP/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 197/JPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT

Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 250Section 43B

DIPAK KUMAR HAZRA,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WARD 47(2), , KOLKATA

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

ITA 1135/KOL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Oct 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 43B

…the amount and since the quantum of GST was in dispute and had not been collected by the assessee, the invocation of section 43B of the Act did not arise. The assessee relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Nobel & Hewitt 305 ITR 324. However, since the assessee did not make any compliance in the course of the proceeding u/s 143(1) r.w.s. 154 of the Act before the CPC on two occasions for filing the profit and loss account, the copy of ITR-3 filed for the year, the copy of tax audit report in Form-3CD, particulars of auditor’s comment on GST payable; therefore non-compliance…

VMS EVENTS PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. ADCIT, CPC, BANGALURU

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 656/DEL/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 250Section 43B

…ot routed through P&L Account and thus no expenditure was claimed. In this regard, reliance is placed on VMS Events Private Limited vs. ADCIT, CPC the judgment of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Nobel and Hewitt India Pvt. Ltd. [2008] 305 ITR 324 (Del.) However, Ld. CIT(A) has not considered the submissions of assessee on merits and confirm the addition based on auditor remark in tax audit report. Under these circumstances, in our considered opinion, matter needs reconsideration on merits of the issue. Accordingly, we set aside the order of Ld. CIT(A) and restore back the appeal to his fi…

SINGAL AND SONS CONSTRUCTION PVT LTD,DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 4 , HISAR

In the result, ground raised by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 264/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmansingal & Sons Construction Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Ito, Ward 4, Behind Sbi Main Branch, Hisar. Delhi Road, Hisar – 125 001 (Haryana). (Pan : Aaccs0362C) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Pranav Yadav, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 10.07.2025 Date Of Order : 10.07.2025 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (For Short ‘Ld. Cit (A)) Dated 06.11.2023 For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are, Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income Declaring Income Of Rs.5,90,940/- On 29.10.2017 For The Ay 2017-18. The Case Was Selected For Complete Scrutiny Through Cass. Accordingly, Notices

For Appellant: Shri Pranav Yadav, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 145(3)Section 41(1)Section 43B

…ry manner without even giving any reason or logic. Since no deduction has been claimed, there is case of making disallowance thereof under any manner, either as made by the A.O. u/s 43B or otherwise. In the case of CIT vs Noble and Hewrit (1) Pvt. Ltd. (2008) 305 ITR 324 (Del), 9 the Hon'ble Delhi High Court held that where the amount was not debited to P & L A/c, amount could not be disallowed u/s 43B. The addition of Rs.24,50,000/- and Rs.57,500/- made by the assessing officer by invoking provisions of 43B of the Act is patently wrong. The assessee has not claimed any deduction of Rs.24,50,000/- and Rs.57,500/…

TIRLOK CHAND SHARMA, F-133, IST FLOOR, ASHOK VIHAR, NEW DELHI,NEW DELHI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 61(1), CIVIC CENTRE, DELHI, NEW DELHI

ITA 6136/DEL/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: the appeal is finally heard or disposed of.

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 250Section 43B

…1 Tirlok Chand Sharma A.Y. 2020-21 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC”: NEW DELHI Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2020-21 Tirlok Chand Sharma, Vs DCIT, Central circle 61(1), F-133, Ist Floor, Ashok Vihar, Delhi. New Delhi. PAN- AKAPS 0865 P APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee represented by Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Adv. Department represented by Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR Date of hearing 16.04.2025 Date of pronouncement 09.07.2025 O R D E R PER Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JM: The instant appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 22.10.2024 passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-7,…

DUSHYANTSINH YADVENDRASINH CHUDASAMA,VADODARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(4), VADODARA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 354/AHD/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.353/Ahd/2022 & 354/Ahd/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2014-15 & 2015-16 Respectively Dushyantsinh Yadvendrasinh The Dy.Commissioner Of बनाम/ Chudasama Income Tax V/S. C/O.Anil R. Shah (Ca), Circle -1 (2) Shreeji House, 4Th Floor Vadodara – 390 007 B/H. M.J. Library Ahmedabad - 380 006 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Acrpc 1888 M (अपीलाथ%/ Appellant) (&' यथ%/ Respondent) Assessee By : Kinjal Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12 /03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 19 /03/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Kinjal Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 40Section 43BSection 68Section 69

…ing to service tax) under Section 43B of the Act can be made when no deduction is claimed in the profit and loss account, and the liability is disclosed as a current liability. While deciding so the Bench relied on the decision of Noble & Hewitt (I) (P) Ltd. (305 ITR 324) (Del.), wherein it was held that if the liability is not debited to the profit and loss account and no deduction is claimed, the provisions of Section 43B of the Act are not applicable. 9.2. Considering the submissions made and the decision of Co-ordinate Bench in case of SDCE Projects Pvt. Ltd.(supra), particularly the observations in paragrap…

DUSHYANTSINH YADVENDRASINH CHUDASAMA,VADODARA vs. DY.COMM. OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(2), VADODARA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 353/AHD/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Kinjal Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 40Section 43BSection 68Section 69

BHANUPRATAP SANTPRASAD SINGH,PARBHANI MAHARASHTRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD HINGOLI, PARBHANI, MAHARASHTRA

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

ITA 251/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.251/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Bhanupratap Santprasad Vs. Ito, Ward- Hingoli, Singh, Parbhani. Pandharkar Niwas, Dnayneshwar Nagar, Parbhani- 431401. Pan : Awgps7884J Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Darshan R Gattani Revenue By : Shri Keyur Patel Date Of Hearing : 07.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.10.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 14.12.2023 Passed By Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-3, Bengaluru For The Assessment Year 2018-19 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Cit(Appeals) Has Erred In Upholding The Addition Of Rs.30,46,456/- Made By The Centralized Processing Centre (Cpc) On Account Of Disallowance U/S 43B For Non-Payment Of Service Tax, Even Though Neither The Tax Amount Was Received From The Customer Nor Was The Service Tax Amount Debited To Profit & Loss Account. Therefore, The Same May Be Deleted.

For Appellant: Shri Darshan R GattaniFor Respondent: Shri Keyur Patel

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.251/PUN/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Bhanupratap Santprasad Vs. ITO, Ward- Hingoli, Singh, Parbhani. Pandharkar Niwas, Dnayneshwar Nagar, Parbhani- 431401. PAN : AWGPS7884J Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Darshan R Gattani Revenue by : Shri Keyur Patel Date of hearing : 07.08.2024 Date of pronouncement : 23.10.2024 आदेश / ORDER PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 14.12.2023 p…

M/S TCG LIFESCIENCES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.O. CIR. 11(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 126/KOL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Aug 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad (Accountant Member), Shri Sonjoy Sarma (Judicial Member)

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 145Section 145ASection 250Section 438Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, KOLKATA डॉ. मनीष बोरड, लेखा सद"य एवं "ी संजय सरमा, "ाियक सद" के सम" Before Dr. Manish Borad, Accountant Member & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member I.T.A. No.126/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2019-20 M/s. TCG Lifesciences Pvt. Ltd. ………. Appellant (PAN: AABCC0401D) Vs. Assessing Officer, Circle-11(1), Kolkata ………… Respondent Appearances by: Shri Ketan K. Ved, CA appeared for Appellant. Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. CIT appeared for Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : 21.05.2024 Date of pronouncing the order : 14.08.2024 ORDER Per Manish Borad, Accountant Member: Th…

M/S.G.S. ATWAL & CO.(ENGG)(P)LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-11(1), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1009/KOL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishra

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate & ShriFor Respondent: Shri B. K. Singh, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 201Section 36(1)(va)

…f the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee relied on the case of CIT Vs. M/s. Vijay Shree Ltd. in ITAT No. 245 of 2011. The assessee has also relied upon the following decisions in the course of the appeal before us: i. CIT v Noble & Hewitt (I) (P) Ltd. 305 ITR 324 (Del) ii. Checkmate Services (P) Ltd. V CIT-I 448 ITR 518 (SC) iii. Parv Buildcon v DCIT Raipur ITA No. 357/RPR/2023 We have gone through the decisions relied upon in both the appeals. However, the same are of no assistance to the assessee. This issue is no longer res integra and the issue has been decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case…

M/S.G.S. ATWAL & CO.(ENGG) (P)LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-11(1), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1008/KOL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishra

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate & ShriFor Respondent: Shri B. K. Singh, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 201Section 36(1)(va)

PLATINUM PROPERTIES,RAIGAD vs. ITO WARD 5, PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, the ground no

ITA 2681/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singhplatinum Properties Vs. Ito, Ward-5 Plot No. 6, G-20-24, Panvel, Taloja, Midc, Tal Panvel, Thane Taloja Raigad-410208 Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aajfp4159N Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Prateek Jain Respondent By : H.M. Bhatt Date Of Hearing 05.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 15.01.2024

For Appellant: Prateek JainFor Respondent: H.M. Bhatt

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 43B

…d is being followed consistently and acceptable method of accounting. Provisions of section 43B will be applicable only when the assessee claimed those payments of statutory dues as expenditure. 10.1 In the case of CIT Vs. Noble and Hewitt (I) P. Ltd., [2008] 305 ITR 324 (Del.), on which reliance placed by the assessee, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has held as under: “6. In our opinion, since the assessee did not debit the amount to the profit & loss account as an expenditure nor did the assessee claim any deduction in respect of the amount and considering that the assessee is following the mercantile system of a…

TOTAL ENVIRONMENT BUILDING SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 352/BANG/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Dec 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R

Section 139(1)Section 250Section 43B

…ITA No.352/Bang/2023 Total Environment Building Systems Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2012-13 Total Environment Building Systems Pvt. Ltd. ‘Imagine’, No.78, ITPL Main Road DCIT EPIP Zone Circle-5(1)(1) Vs. Whitefield Bangalore Bangalore 560 066 PAN NO : AABCT9452F APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar, A.R. Respondent by : Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R. Date of Hearing : 18.12.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 18.12.2023 O R D E R PER CHANDRA P…

HUBLI ELECTRICITY SUPPLY ,HUBBALLI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), HUBALLI

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

ITA 341/BANG/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Dec 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Smt. Prathibha R., A.RFor Respondent: Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R

Section 194CSection 194JSection 201Section 250Section 40

…ITA No.341/Bang/2023 Hubli Electricity Supply, Hubli IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2010-11 Hubli Electricity Supply 0, PB Road, Navanagar DCIT Hubli 580 025 Vs. Circle-1(1) Hubli PAN NO : AABCH3176J APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Smt. Prathibha R., A.R. Respondent by : Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R. Date of Hearing : 30.11.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 01.12.2023 O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal by assessee is directed against order of NFAC passed…

PRADEEP KUMAR DHURVE,DURG vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), BHILAI, BHILAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 302/RPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur23 Nov 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 302/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Pradeep Kumar Dhurve Near Pawan Kirana Store, Sangram Chowk, Prem Nagar, Sikola Bhata, Durg (C.G.)-491 001 Pan : Aanpd6067H

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण "यायपीठ रायपुर म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 302/RPR/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Pradeep Kumar Dhurve Near Pawan Kirana Store, Sangram Chowk, Prem Nagar, Sikola Bhata, Durg (C.G.)-491 001 PAN : AANPD6067H .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/s. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Bhilai (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee by : Shri R.B Doshi, CA Revenue by : Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hear…

ASHRAF NAFISA ALTHAF,MOODUBIDRI MANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 & TPS, UDUPI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 614/BANG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Nov 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Sanketh S. Nayak, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Nischal B., D.R

Section 139(1)Section 250Section 40Section 43B

…d by it as the Central sales tax and the State sales tax. Decision was in favour of assessee.” Mr. Asraf Nafisa Althaf, Mangalore Page 3 of 21 4.1. Further, he relied on the judgement of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Noble Hewitt Pvt. Ltd. (305 ITR 324) (Del.) wherein held as under: “6. In our opinion since the assessee did not debit the amount to the Profit & Loss account as an expenditure nor did the assessee claim any deduction in respect of the amount and considering that the assessee is following the mercantile system of accounting, the question of disallowing the deduction not claimed wou…

AHLUWALIA ERECTORS & FABRICATORS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated hereinabove

ITA 433/JPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra Addl. CITa

Section 143(3)Section 234B

…1 AHLUWALIA ERECTORS & FABRICATORS (P) LTD VS ACIT, KOTA आयकरअपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुरन्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A ” JAIPUR MkWa- ,l-lhrky{eh] U;kf;dlnL; ,oaJhjkBksMdeys'kt;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;djvihy la-@ITA. No. 433/JP/2022 fu/kZkj.ko"kZ@AssessmentYear :2017-18 M/s. Ahluwalia Erectors &Fabricatrs (P) Ltd. cuke The ACIT Vs. Kota E-77, IPIA, Kota- 324 005 (Raj) LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAAHCA 0089 K vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby : Shri M…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(1), BHILAI vs. SHRI SANDEEP SURENDRAN NAIR, BHILAI

In the result, grounds of appeal raised by Revenue in the present appeal found to be squarely covered in favour of the assessee and thus the same are rejected

ITA 100/RPR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.100/Rpr/2018 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 V. The Dcit-1(1) Shri Sandeep Surendran Bhilai Nair, Prop. M/S. Vasava Engineering Construction, 113-Friends Arcade, Shastri Nagar, Supela, Bhilai [Pan: Aczpn 2865 M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By Shri Makarand M. Joshi & Shri Aniruddha Kavimandan, Cas ""थ" की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, : Sr. D.R. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 22.08.2023 : घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 14.09.2023

Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 253Section 43B

…eral Courts and came to the conclusion that in a situation when deduction has not been claimed and a separate account has been maintained, then disallowance u/s 43B of the IT Act should not be made. In the case of CIT Vs Noble & Hewitt (India) (P) Ltd. (2008) 305 ITR 324 (Del.), the case of Chowringhee Sales Bureau P. Ltd. Vs CIT (1977) 110 ITR 385 (Cal.) has been distinguished and it was held that when the amount of tax has not been debited to profit & loss account as an expenditure nor claimed any deduction in respect of the said amount then, the question of disallowance u/s 43B of the IT Act does not arise. Re…

Showing 1–20 of 109 · Page 1 of 6