CIT v. Ogale Glass Works Ltd.

25 ITR 529Supreme Court of India1954#5023 most cited

What is CIT v. Ogale Glass Works Ltd. authority for?

Payment by cheque is considered to be made on the date the cheque is presented, not when it is cleared, provided it is not dishonoured. This principle relates back to the date of receipt of the cheque.

23

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Ogale Glass Works Ltd. · 25 ITR 529 · SC · date of payment · presentation of cheque · clearing of cheque · negotiable instrument · date of receipt of cheque · TDS delay

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 143(1)Section 250Section 125Section 131Section 142 of Chapter XIV of the Social Security CodeSection 142(1)Section 142A

Issues it is cited on

section 143(1)appeal before the tribunaltransferprescribedtotal incomesection 250indiasection 143companydocumentsection 14interest

Judgments citing CIT v. Ogale Glass Works Ltd.

SPORTA TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI vs. DCIT 3(1)(1) , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby allowed

ITA 3500/MUM/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2026AY 2024-25

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara, Am M/S. Sporta Technologies Private Additional/Joint Commissioner Of Limited, Income Tax (Appeals) – 1 Jaipur, Unit 1201, 1202, A-Wing, Dcit 3(1)(1), Vs. 12Th Floor One Bkc, Plot No.66, Aayakar Bhawan, G Block Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai Mumbai – 400 051 Pan: Aagca4854K (Appellant) : (Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 234CSection 250

…cheque has to be considered as date of payment and not the date of clearing of the cheque. In the said decision his Lordships had extensively relied on the proposition laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ogale Glass Works Ltd. (1954) 25 ITR 529 where there has been a 5 M/s. Sporta Technologies Private Limited discussion as to when payment by negotiable instrument takes effect, where the Hon’ble Apex Court took note of BYLES on bills 20th Edition, Page 23 in which the position is summarized as ‘A cheque, unless dishonoured, is payment’. It was reiterated that when a cheque which was not…

PRITPAL SINGH BASAN,JHARKHAND vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( APPEAL), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 957/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Sri Rakesh Mishra

Section 144Section 250Section 6(6)

…has also enclosed a copy of the Circular No. 13/2017 along with the Corrigendum to the Circular. 5. The assessee filed a rectification petition u/s 154 of the Act on 27.03.2017 by relying upon the decision in the case of CIT Vs. Ogale Glass Works Ltd. [1954] 25 ITR 529 (SC) and attaching the Circular No. 13/2017 dated 11.04.2017 and corrigendum to the Circular No. 13/2017 wherein line 4 of paragraph 2 of the Circular, ‘foreign ship’ was to be read as ‘foreign going ship (with Indian flag or foreign going flag)’. Since the rectification petition has not been decided, therefore, the assessee has filed the appeal b…

PRITPAL SINGH BASAN,JAMSHEDPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - APPEALS, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1003/KOL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Sri Rakesh Mishra

Section 144Section 250Section 6(6)

…has also enclosed a copy of the Circular No. 13/2017 along with the Corrigendum to the Circular. 5. The assessee filed a rectification petition u/s 154 of the Act on 27.03.2017 by relying upon the decision in the case of CIT Vs. Ogale Glass Works Ltd. [1954] 25 ITR 529 (SC) and attaching the Circular No. 13/2017 dated 11.04.2017 and corrigendum to the Circular No. 13/2017 wherein line 4 of paragraph 2 of the Circular, ‘foreign ship’ was to be read as ‘foreign going ship (with Indian flag or foreign going flag)’. Since the rectification petition has not been decided, therefore, the assessee has filed the appeal b…

THE KANGRA CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-62(1), DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assesse is allowed

ITA 3528/DEL/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Learned CIT(A) which was dismissed vide order dated 07/06/2024.

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

…ection 201(IA) of the Act. He was, however, justified in deciding the issue of delay in payment of TDS in favour of the assessee questioned by the Revenue in view of the decision of the hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Ogale Glass Works Ltd. [1954] 25 ITR 529. " Hon'ble ITAT, Delhi Bench in case of Natma Securities Ltd V. ACIT [2022] 145 taxmann.com 291) has observed that no interest could be levied under section 201(1A) when the cheque was deposited The Kangra Co-operative Bank Ltd. vs. DCIT within the due date in the Bank, however due to mistake of the Banker such cheque is cleared late. The relevan…

BIMLA,DELHI vs. ITO WARD-38(5), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 7973/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareekbimla, Vs. Ito, Ward 38 (5), H.No.143, Village Hamidpur, New Delhi. Delhi – 110 036. (Pan : Bpdpb9344B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate Shri Ankit Kumar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 18.09.2024 Date Of Order : 26.11.2024 Order Per S.Rifaur Rahman,Am: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax Appeals-13, New Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To ‘Ld. Cit (A)’) Dated 23.07.2019 For Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are, Assessee Filed Return Of Income Declaring Total Income Of Rs.2,23,030/- On 14.08.2014. The Return Of Income Was Processed Under Section 143 (1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act’). The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Through Cass & Notices

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 143Section 143(2)Section 69

…4, mere registration in 2014-15 will not attract provisions of section 56(2)(vii)(b)(ii) of the Act effective from AY 2014-15, since the same shall be against the doctrine of relating back. In this regard, he relied on the decision of CIT vs. Glass Works Ltd. 25 ITR 529 (SC). Further he submitted that even otherwise also not only the addition made by the first appellate authority is without jurisdiction but also beyond his 9 power granted under statue. He submitted that powers of ld. CIT (A) are contained in section 251(1) of the Act, which reads as under: “251. (1) In disposing of an appeal, the Commissioner (A…

INDIRA GIRI,JAIPUR vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, INCOME TAX DEPARMENT JAIPUR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 511/JPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 Jan 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: The Due Date Of Furnishing Itr, Therefore Deposit In Capital Gain Account For Compliance U/S 54(2) Was Impossible On The Part Of The Assessee.

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Manik (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Anup Singh (Addl.CIT) a
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 54Section 54(2)Section 54F

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 511/JPR/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2016-17 cuke Indira Giri Assessing Officer, 1287, Mali Mohalla, outside Vs. Ward-2(5), Income Tax Office, Jaipur. Chandpole Gate, Jaipur. . LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ABBPG 7713 Q vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Sandeep Ma…

PEAREY LAL & SONS (E.P.) PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, ROHTAK

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 5191/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Sept 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri R.K. Kapoor, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jagdish Singh, Sr. DR
Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)

…calculated based on date of clearing of the cheque or date of presentation of the cheque. “5. The issue raised in this appeal is no longer res integra in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Ogale Glass Works Ltd., [1954] 25 ITR 529 = 2002-TIOL-631-SC-IT-LB, wherein it is held as under: "11. ….. When it is said that a payment by negotiable instrument is a conditional payment what is meant is that such payment is subject to a condition subsequent that if the negotiable instrument is dishonoured on presentation the creditor may consider it as waste paper and resort to his orig…

MUNICIAPL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (TDS) 1(3), MUMBAI

In the result, impugned order is set aside and the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1031/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 May 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Rajesh Kumarआअसं.1024 से 1031/मुं/2019 ("न. व. 2011-12 & 2012-13)

For Appellant: Shri Rushabh MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Jaiswal /
Section 154Section 194CSection 2Section 200ASection 201

…of the cheque is the date of actual payment. To decide this question, it would be relevant to refer to some decisions rendered over the period of time on this issue. 11. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT vs. Ogale Glass Works Ltd., (1954) 25 ITR 529 held that where the payment is made by cheque, the date of payment would be date of delivery of cheque, provided the cheque is honoured on presentation to the bank. The relevant extract of the judgement reads as under: “In the case before us none of the cheques has been dishonoured on presentation and payment cannot, therefore, be said to have bee…

MUNICIAPL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (TDS) 1(3), MUMBAI

In the result, impugned order is set aside and the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1030/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 May 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Rajesh Kumarआअसं.1024 से 1031/मुं/2019 ("न. व. 2011-12 & 2012-13)

For Appellant: Shri Rushabh MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Jaiswal /
Section 154Section 194CSection 2Section 200ASection 201

…of the cheque is the date of actual payment. To decide this question, it would be relevant to refer to some decisions rendered over the period of time on this issue. 11. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT vs. Ogale Glass Works Ltd., (1954) 25 ITR 529 held that where the payment is made by cheque, the date of payment would be date of delivery of cheque, provided the cheque is honoured on presentation to the bank. The relevant extract of the judgement reads as under: “In the case before us none of the cheques has been dishonoured on presentation and payment cannot, therefore, be said to have bee…

MUNICIAPL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (TDS) 1(3), MUMBAI

In the result, impugned order is set aside and the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1028/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 May 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Rajesh Kumarआअसं.1024 से 1031/मुं/2019 ("न. व. 2011-12 & 2012-13)

For Appellant: Shri Rushabh MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Jaiswal
Section 154Section 194CSection 2Section 200ASection 201

…of the cheque is the date of actual payment. To decide this question, it would be relevant to refer to some decisions rendered over the period of time on this issue. 11. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT vs. Ogale Glass Works Ltd., (1954) 25 ITR 529 held that where the payment is made by cheque, the date of payment would be date of delivery of cheque, provided the cheque is honoured on presentation to the bank. The relevant extract of the judgement reads as under: “In the case before us none of the cheques has been dishonoured on presentation and payment cannot, therefore, be said to have bee…

M/S MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-1(3), MUMBAI

In the result, impugned order is set aside and the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1027/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 May 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Rajesh Kumarआअसं.1024 से 1031/मुं/2019 ("न. व. 2011-12 & 2012-13)

For Appellant: Shri Rushabh MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Jaiswal
Section 154Section 194CSection 2Section 200ASection 201

…of the cheque is the date of actual payment. To decide this question, it would be relevant to refer to some decisions rendered over the period of time on this issue. 11. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT vs. Ogale Glass Works Ltd., (1954) 25 ITR 529 held that where the payment is made by cheque, the date of payment would be date of delivery of cheque, provided the cheque is honoured on presentation to the bank. The relevant extract of the judgement reads as under: “In the case before us none of the cheques has been dishonoured on presentation and payment cannot, therefore, be said to have bee…

M/S MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-1(3), MUMBAI

In the result, impugned order is set aside and the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1026/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 May 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Rajesh Kumarआअसं.1024 से 1031/मुं/2019 ("न. व. 2011-12 & 2012-13)

For Appellant: Shri Rushabh MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Jaiswal
Section 154Section 194CSection 2Section 200ASection 201

…of the cheque is the date of actual payment. To decide this question, it would be relevant to refer to some decisions rendered over the period of time on this issue. 11. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT vs. Ogale Glass Works Ltd., (1954) 25 ITR 529 held that where the payment is made by cheque, the date of payment would be date of delivery of cheque, provided the cheque is honoured on presentation to the bank. The relevant extract of the judgement reads as under: “In the case before us none of the cheques has been dishonoured on presentation and payment cannot, therefore, be said to have bee…

M/S MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-1(3), MUMBAI

In the result, impugned order is set aside and the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1025/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 May 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Rajesh Kumarआअसं.1024 से 1031/मुं/2019 ("न. व. 2011-12 & 2012-13)

For Appellant: Shri Rushabh MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Jaiswal /
Section 154Section 194CSection 2Section 200ASection 201

…of the cheque is the date of actual payment. To decide this question, it would be relevant to refer to some decisions rendered over the period of time on this issue. 11. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT vs. Ogale Glass Works Ltd., (1954) 25 ITR 529 held that where the payment is made by cheque, the date of payment would be date of delivery of cheque, provided the cheque is honoured on presentation to the bank. The relevant extract of the judgement reads as under: “In the case before us none of the cheques has been dishonoured on presentation and payment cannot, therefore, be said to have bee…

M/S MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, impugned order is set aside and the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1024/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 May 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Rajesh Kumarआअसं.1024 से 1031/मुं/2019 ("न. व. 2011-12 & 2012-13)

For Appellant: Shri Rushabh MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Jaiswal /
Section 154Section 194CSection 2Section 200ASection 201

…of the cheque is the date of actual payment. To decide this question, it would be relevant to refer to some decisions rendered over the period of time on this issue. 11. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT vs. Ogale Glass Works Ltd., (1954) 25 ITR 529 held that where the payment is made by cheque, the date of payment would be date of delivery of cheque, provided the cheque is honoured on presentation to the bank. The relevant extract of the judgement reads as under: “In the case before us none of the cheques has been dishonoured on presentation and payment cannot, therefore, be said to have bee…

STANDARD CHARTERED BANK,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (TDS) 2(2), MUMBAI

The appeal stands allowed to the extent indicated in the order

ITA 2156/MUM/2018[2008-09(24Q-FY 2007-08 Q2)]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2020

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.2153 To 2156/Mum/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Standard Chartered Bank Dcit (Tds)-2(2) Taxation Department, Room No.717 बनाम/ C-38/39, G-Block, Behind Mca Club, Smt. K.G. Mittal Ayurvedic Hospital Bldg. Vs. 7Th Floor, Bandra Kurla Complex, Charni Road Bandra East, Mumbai 400 051. Mumbai 400 002. Pan/Tan: Aabcs-4681-D / Mums30129B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Assessee By : Shri Madhur Aggarwal – Ld. Ar Revenue By : Shri V. Vinod Kumar-Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 18/08/2020 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 21/08/2020 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Aggarwal – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri V. Vinod Kumar-Ld. DR
Section 154Section 200Section 201Section 220(2)

…ard Chartered Bank ITA Nos.2153 to 2156/Mum/2018 Assessment Year: 2008-09 P.L.Haulwel Trailers Ltd. Vs DCIT (100 ITD 485 20/01/2006) for the said proposition. Reliance was also placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT V/s Ogale Glass Works Ltd. (25 ITR 529 19/04/1954) for the submissions that the payment would relate back to the date of receipt of the cheque. The said decision was stated to be followed by Hon’ble Apex Court in DIT V/s Raunaq Educational Foundation (350 ITR 420) as well as Hon’ble Madras High Court in CIT V/s Repco Home Finance Ltd. (53 Taxmann.com 47). Reliance was placed on similar…

STANDARD CHARTERED BANK,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (TDS) 2(2), MUMBAI

The appeal stands allowed to the extent indicated in the order

ITA 2155/MUM/2018[2008-09 (24Q-FY 2007-08 Q1)]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2020

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.2153 To 2156/Mum/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Standard Chartered Bank Dcit (Tds)-2(2) Taxation Department, Room No.717 बनाम/ C-38/39, G-Block, Behind Mca Club, Smt. K.G. Mittal Ayurvedic Hospital Bldg. Vs. 7Th Floor, Bandra Kurla Complex, Charni Road Bandra East, Mumbai 400 051. Mumbai 400 002. Pan/Tan: Aabcs-4681-D / Mums30129B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Assessee By : Shri Madhur Aggarwal – Ld. Ar Revenue By : Shri V. Vinod Kumar-Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 18/08/2020 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 21/08/2020 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Aggarwal – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri V. Vinod Kumar-Ld. DR
Section 154Section 200Section 201Section 220(2)

…ard Chartered Bank ITA Nos.2153 to 2156/Mum/2018 Assessment Year: 2008-09 P.L.Haulwel Trailers Ltd. Vs DCIT (100 ITD 485 20/01/2006) for the said proposition. Reliance was also placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT V/s Ogale Glass Works Ltd. (25 ITR 529 19/04/1954) for the submissions that the payment would relate back to the date of receipt of the cheque. The said decision was stated to be followed by Hon’ble Apex Court in DIT V/s Raunaq Educational Foundation (350 ITR 420) as well as Hon’ble Madras High Court in CIT V/s Repco Home Finance Ltd. (53 Taxmann.com 47). Reliance was placed on similar…

STANDARD CHARTERED BANK,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (TDS) 2(2), MUMBAI

The appeal stands allowed to the extent indicated in the order

ITA 2154/MUM/2018[2008-09(24Q-FY 2007-08 Q3)]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2020

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.2153 To 2156/Mum/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Standard Chartered Bank Dcit (Tds)-2(2) Taxation Department, Room No.717 बनाम/ C-38/39, G-Block, Behind Mca Club, Smt. K.G. Mittal Ayurvedic Hospital Bldg. Vs. 7Th Floor, Bandra Kurla Complex, Charni Road Bandra East, Mumbai 400 051. Mumbai 400 002. Pan/Tan: Aabcs-4681-D / Mums30129B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Assessee By : Shri Madhur Aggarwal – Ld. Ar Revenue By : Shri V. Vinod Kumar-Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 18/08/2020 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 21/08/2020 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Aggarwal – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri V. Vinod Kumar-Ld. DR
Section 154Section 200Section 201Section 220(2)

…ard Chartered Bank ITA Nos.2153 to 2156/Mum/2018 Assessment Year: 2008-09 P.L.Haulwel Trailers Ltd. Vs DCIT (100 ITD 485 20/01/2006) for the said proposition. Reliance was also placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT V/s Ogale Glass Works Ltd. (25 ITR 529 19/04/1954) for the submissions that the payment would relate back to the date of receipt of the cheque. The said decision was stated to be followed by Hon’ble Apex Court in DIT V/s Raunaq Educational Foundation (350 ITR 420) as well as Hon’ble Madras High Court in CIT V/s Repco Home Finance Ltd. (53 Taxmann.com 47). Reliance was placed on similar…

STANDARD CHARTERED BANK,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (TDS) 2(2), MUMBAI

The appeal stands allowed to the extent indicated in the order

ITA 2153/MUM/2018[2008-09 (24Q-FY 2007-08 Q4)]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2020

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.2153 To 2156/Mum/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Standard Chartered Bank Dcit (Tds)-2(2) Taxation Department, Room No.717 बनाम/ C-38/39, G-Block, Behind Mca Club, Smt. K.G. Mittal Ayurvedic Hospital Bldg. Vs. 7Th Floor, Bandra Kurla Complex, Charni Road Bandra East, Mumbai 400 051. Mumbai 400 002. Pan/Tan: Aabcs-4681-D / Mums30129B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Assessee By : Shri Madhur Aggarwal – Ld. Ar Revenue By : Shri V. Vinod Kumar-Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 18/08/2020 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 21/08/2020 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Aggarwal – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri V. Vinod Kumar-Ld. DR
Section 154Section 200Section 201Section 220(2)

…ard Chartered Bank ITA Nos.2153 to 2156/Mum/2018 Assessment Year: 2008-09 P.L.Haulwel Trailers Ltd. Vs DCIT (100 ITD 485 20/01/2006) for the said proposition. Reliance was also placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT V/s Ogale Glass Works Ltd. (25 ITR 529 19/04/1954) for the submissions that the payment would relate back to the date of receipt of the cheque. The said decision was stated to be followed by Hon’ble Apex Court in DIT V/s Raunaq Educational Foundation (350 ITR 420) as well as Hon’ble Madras High Court in CIT V/s Repco Home Finance Ltd. (53 Taxmann.com 47). Reliance was placed on similar…

VIJAY AGGARWAL,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 48(5), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of different assessees are partly allowed

ITA 1077/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahuassessment Year: 2010-11

Section 147Section 148Section 56(2)(vii)Section 68

…n, the date of payment, if the cheque is duly met, is the date when the cheque was posted." ITA Nos. 1077 to 1081/Del/2019 23 19. It is submitted that aforesaid judgment has been followed by the Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Ogale Glass Works Ltd. [1954] 25 ITR 529 wherein it was held that even if the cheques were taken conditionally, the cheques not having been dishonoured but having been cashed, the payment related back to the dates of the receipt of the cheques and in law the dates of payments were the dates of the delivery of the cheques. The findings of the Apex Court are as under: “In the case before…

RAMESH HARIBHAU GAWALI,,AHMEDNAGAR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,,

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

ITA 1013/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri S.N. DoshiFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Jha, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 40Section 40A(3)

…010 and the same was not dishonoured, it is to be presumed that the assessee has deposited the TDS on 15.10.2010 and in support of which he placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs Ogale Glass works Ltd. Reported in (1954) 25 ITR 529 (SC). He further submitted that Ld.CIT(A) has erred in coming to conclusion that the TDS was deposited on 20.10.2010. He therefore submitted that no disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act is called for and the expense be allowed. Ld DR on the other hand took us through the order of AO and CIT(A). He pointing to the order of Ld.CIT(A) submitted th…

Showing 1–20 of 23 · Page 1 of 2

CIT v. Ogale Glass Works Ltd. (25 ITR 529) — Cited in 23 Judgments | BharatTax