CIT v. Sabari Enterprises

213 CTR 269High Court2007#17209 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(1)(a)Section 234B Section 234C Section 36(1)(va)Section 143(1)(a)(iv)

Judgments citing CIT v. Sabari Enterprises

Cae Simulation Technologies Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 2403/BANG/2025[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Mar 2026AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri. Abdul Kadir Jawadiwala, by AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri

Section 139Section 143Section 36Section 43B

…We find that the intimation was passed on 12 May 2020 as on that date there were decisions of the honourable Karnataka High Court in favour of the assessee in case of [1] Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Sabari Enterprises [2008] 298 ITR 141 (Karnataka)/[2007] 213 CTR 269 (Karnataka)[03-07-2007] [2] Spectrum Consultants India (P.) Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bangalore - III [2013] 34 taxmann.com 20 ITA Nos.2402 and 2403/Bang/2025 Page 4 of 6 (Karnataka)/[2013] 215 Taxman 597 (Karnataka)/[2014] 266 CTR 94 (Karnataka)[17-04-2013] which was approved in Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Alom Extrusions Ltd. [2…

Cae Simulation Technologies Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 2402/BANG/2025[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Mar 2026AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri. Abdul Kadir Jawadiwala, by AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri

Section 139Section 143Section 36Section 43B

Nagravision India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-5(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 1536/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jul 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B R Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri Pradhan Dass, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR-I)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…due date to the respective organizations but which are deposited before the due date for filing return of income u/s.139(1) of the Act, cannot be disallowed u/s.36(1)(va) of the Act. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sabari Enterprises (213 CTR 269) has taken the view that contributions made by the Assessee to PF and ESI are allowable deductions even though made beyond stipulated period as contemplated under the mandatory provisions off Sec.36(1)(va) read with Section 2(24)(x) of the Act provided such contributions are paid by the Assessee on or before the due date for furnishing the return…

ITO, Bangalore vs. M/S Cenduit India Services Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the CO is partly allowed

ITA 59/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Apr 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R.Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri Ketan K Ved, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 431B

…due date to the respective organizations but which are deposited before the due date for filing return of income u/s.139(1) of the Act, cannot be disallowed u/s.36(1)(va) of the Act. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sabari Enterprises (213 CTR 269) taken the view that contributions made by the Assessee to PF and ESI are allowable deductions even though made beyond stipulated period as contemplated under the mandatory provisions off Sec.36(1)(va) read with Section 2(24)(x) of the Act provided such contributions are paid by the Assessee on or before the due date for furnishing the return of…

DCIT, Cir-1(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Garden Reach Shipbuilders & Engineers Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 355/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Dec 2017AY 2011-2012

For Appellant: Shri Arindam Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT, ld.DRFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Bhattacharjee, FCA, ld.AR

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

…the month of November, 2010 employees contribution RS.10670319 and actual payment on 22.12.2010 and for the month of January, 2011 contribution Rs. 10858084 and actual date of payment on 23.02.2011. I have duly considered the judgment of Karnataka High Court 213 CTR 269, wherein it was held that contributions made by assessee to PF and ESI are allowable even though made beyond stipulated section 36(1)(va), read with section 2(24 )(x), provided such contributions are paid' by assessee on or before due date. In view of the above, the appellant's contentions are found to be correct as! the disputed contribution to…