CIT v. Vijay Shree Ltd.

356 ITR 351High Court2013#3959 most cited

What is CIT v. Vijay Shree Ltd. authority for?

Deductions for employer and employee contributions to PF and ESI are covered by Section 43B of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Amendments made to Section 36(1)(va) by the Finance Act 2021 are prospective, not retrospective.

30

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Vijay Shree Ltd. · section 43B · section 36(1)(va) · PF · ESI · deduction · employer contribution · employee contribution · Finance Act 2021 · prospective amendment

Also reported as

43 Taxmann 396

Issues it is cited on

section 2(24)(x)section 36(1)(va)section 2(24)section 43bsection 36(1)section 43section 36section 139prescribedsection 143(3)nfacbusiness

Judgments citing CIT v. Vijay Shree Ltd.

Bharat Heavy Plate & Vessels Limited, Now Known As Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited (Hpvp Unit), Visakhapatnam vs. DCIT, Circle-3(1), Visakhapatnam

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

ITA 406/VIZ/2017[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam21 Mar 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran, Hon’Ble & Shri Duvvuru R.L. Reddy, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri I. Kama Sastry – CAFor Respondent: Shri Deba Kumar Sonawal – CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 253Section 36(1)(va)

…fter the due date under the respective Act but before filing of the return of income u/s.139(1) cannot be disallowed u/s.43B, or u/s.36(1)(v)(a) of the IT.Act. Similar views were taken by the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Vijay Shree Ltd. 43 Taxmann 396, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT. Vs. Dharmendra Sharma 297 ITR 328, CIT Vs. AIMIL Ltd. & Others (321 ITR 508), the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Nexus Computer Pvt. Ltd. 313 ITR 144 & the Hon'ble Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Nipso Poly fabric Pvt. Ltd.(350 ITR 327 HP). The Hon'ble ITAT,…

Bharat Heavy Plate & Vessels Limited, Now Known As Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited (Hpvp Unit), Visakhapatnam vs. DCIT, Circle-3(1), Visakhapatnam

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

ITA 405/VIZ/2017[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam21 Mar 2018AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran, Hon’Ble & Shri Duvvuru R.L. Reddy, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri I. Kama Sastry – CAFor Respondent: Shri Deba Kumar Sonawal – CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 253Section 36(1)(va)

…fter the due date under the respective Act but before filing of the return of income u/s.139(1) cannot be disallowed u/s.43B, or u/s.36(1)(v)(a) of the IT.Act. Similar views were taken by the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Vijay Shree Ltd. 43 Taxmann 396, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT. Vs. Dharmendra Sharma 297 ITR 328, CIT Vs. AIMIL Ltd. & Others (321 ITR 508), the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Nexus Computer Pvt. Ltd. 313 ITR 144 & the Hon'ble Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Nipso Poly fabric Pvt. Ltd.(350 ITR 327 HP). The Hon'ble ITAT,…

M/S. Kalinga Institute of Training for Security & Consultancy Services, Balasore vs. ITO, Ward-1, Balasore

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 436/CTK/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 Dec 2017AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri P.R.Mohanty, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR
Section 139(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…3 ITR 307 (Raj) held that section 43B overrides section 36(1)(va) and deduction is available for employees contribution u/s.43B of the Act To same effect is the decision of Hon’ble Uttarakhand High Court in the case of CIT vs.Kichha Sugar Company Ltd . (2013) 356 ITR 351 (Uttarakhand–HC) order dated 20.5.2013. To the same effect is also the decision of Hon’ble Rajasthan High court in the case of CIT vs. Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sangh Ltd (2013) 35 taxmann.com 616 (Raj). The contrary view is that of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs Gujarat State Road Transport Corpn. (2014) 366 ITR 170 (Guj)…

M/S. Kalinga Institute of Training for Security & Consultancy Services, Balasore vs. ITO, Ward-1, Balasore

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 435/CTK/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 Dec 2017AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri P.R.Mohanty, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR
Section 139(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…3 ITR 307 (Raj) held that section 43B overrides section 36(1)(va) and deduction is available for employees contribution u/s.43B of the Act To same effect is the decision of Hon’ble Uttarakhand High Court in the case of CIT vs.Kichha Sugar Company Ltd . (2013) 356 ITR 351 (Uttarakhand–HC) order dated 20.5.2013. To the same effect is also the decision of Hon’ble Rajasthan High court in the case of CIT vs. Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sangh Ltd (2013) 35 taxmann.com 616 (Raj). The contrary view is that of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs Gujarat State Road Transport Corpn. (2014) 366 ITR 170 (Guj)…

Denis Chem Lab Limited, Gandhinagar vs. The ACIT, Mehsana Circle, Mehsana

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

ITA 2668/AHD/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Dec 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Mahavir Prasaddenis Chem Lab Ltd. Acit, बनाम/ Block No.457, Mehsana Circle, Vs. Gidc Estate, Phase – I, Mehsana. Village : Chhatral, Tal. Kalol, Dist. Gandhinagar. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacd 4123 C .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Shri Parth Patel, Ar अपीलाथ" ओर से / Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri O.P. Pathak, Joit.Cit

For Respondent: Shri O.P. Pathak, Joit.CIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 244ASection 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…. (2010) 35 DTR (Del) 68 (Delhi High Court) Denis Chem lab Ltd. vs. ACIT A.Y. 2012-13 k) CIT v. ANZ Information Technology 318 ITR 123 (Karnataka) I) Additional CIT v. Vestas RRB India Limited (2005) 93 TTJ (Del) 144 m) CIT v. Kichha Sugar Company Ltd. (2013) 356 ITR 351 (Uttarakhand-HC) n) CIT v. Nipso Polyfabriks Ltd. (2013) 350 ITR 327 (HP) o) CIT v. Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sangh Ltd. (2013) 53 (I) ITCL 433 (Raj-HC). p) Commissioner of Income-Tax, Faridabad Vs. Hemla Embroidery Mills (P) Ltd., [2013] 37 taxmann.com 160 (Punjab & Haryana). q) Spectrum Consultants (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (Karnataka High…

M/S. Powerware India Pvt. Ltd., Bhubaneswar vs. ITO, Ward-1(2), Bhubaneswar

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

ITA 206/CTK/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack29 Nov 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.S.Sainiआयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.206/Ctk/2017 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) M/S Powerware India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ito, Ward-1(2), 6A, Zone-B, Mancheswar Bhubaneswar Industrial Estate, Bhubaneswar- 751010 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaccp 1607 R (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri NoneFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR
Section 194ASection 194CSection 36(1)(va)Section 40

…3 ITR 307 (Raj) held that section 43B overrides section 36(1)(va) and deduction is available for employees contribution u/s.43B of the Act To same effect is the decision of Hon’ble Uttarakhand High Court in the case of CIT vs.Kichha Sugar Company Ltd . (2013) 356 ITR 351 (Uttarakhand–HC) order dated 20.5.2013. To the same effect is also the decision of Hon’ble Rajasthan High court in the case of CIT vs. Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sangh Ltd (2013) 35 taxmann.com 616 (Raj). The contrary view is that of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs Gujarat State Road Transport Corpn. (2014) 366 ITR 170 (Guj)…

Subhalaxmi Agencies Pvt. Ltd., Nayagarh vs. JCIT, Ramge-2, Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed and that of

ITA 132/CTK/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack21 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR
Section 194ASection 194CSection 194JSection 40

…ITR 70 (Raj) (HC) and Jaipur Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Ltd., (2014) 363 ITR 307 (Raj) held that section 43B overrides section 36(1)(va) and deduction is available for employee’s contribution u/s.43B of the Act To same effect is the decision of Hon’ble . (2013) 356 ITR 351 (Uttarakhand–HC) order dated 20.5.2013. To the same effect is also the decision of Hon’ble Rajasthan High court in the case of CIT vs. Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sangh Ltd (2013) 35 taxmann.com 616 (Raj). The contrary view is that of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs Gujarat State Road Transport Corpn. (2014) 366 ITR 170 (Gu…

Orissa Air Products Pvt. Ltd., Dhenkanal vs. ACIT, Circle-1(2), Bhubaneswar

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

ITA 6/CTK/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack18 May 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.S Sainiassessment Year : 2012-2013

For Appellant: Shri T.K.Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR
Section 139(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 28Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK ‘SMC’ BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI N.S SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2012-2013 Orissa Air Products (P) Ltd., Vs. ACIT, Circle 1(2), NH-42, Gundicha Pada, Bhubaneswar. Dhenkanal. PAN/GIR No. AAACO 6590 J (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee by : Shri T.K.Agarwal, AR Revenue by : Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR Date of Hearing : 17 /05/ 2017 Date of Pronouncement : 18 /05/ 2017 O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A)-1, Bhubaneswar, dated 8.9.2016, for the assessment year 2012-2013 . 2. Ground No.1 of the appeal is directed…

Mylan Laboratories Limited, Telangana vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed and the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 214/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Oct 2015AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Kumar Jain, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Chandana Ramachandran, CIT-III(DR)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92C

…an Enigma Ltd. (2014) (363 ITR 70) (Raja HC) - CIT vs. Rajasthan Raja Idiot Utahan Enigma Ltd. (2014) (363 ITR 307) - CIT vs. Animal Ltd. & Ors. (2010) 229 CTR 418 (Del HC) - CIT vs. Vine Cement Ltd. (2009) 313 ITR (St) 1 - CIT vs. Kasha Sugar Co. Ltd (2013) (356 ITR 351) (Uttarakhand HC) - CIT vs Spectrum Consultants India (P.) Ltd Vs CIT (2014) (266 CTR 241) (Kar HC) - CIT vs Nipso Polyfabriks Ltd (213 Taxman 376) (Himachal Pradesh HC) - CIT vs ANZ Information Technology (P.) Ltd (2010) (318 ITR 123) (Kar HC) - CIT vs. Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sangh Ltd. (2013) 35 taxmann.com 616 (Raj.)(HC) - Imerys Ceram…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Agila Specialties Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed and the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 179/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Oct 2015AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Kumar Jain, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Chandana Ramachandran, CIT-III(DR)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92C

…an Enigma Ltd. (2014) (363 ITR 70) (Raja HC) - CIT vs. Rajasthan Raja Idiot Utahan Enigma Ltd. (2014) (363 ITR 307) - CIT vs. Animal Ltd. & Ors. (2010) 229 CTR 418 (Del HC) - CIT vs. Vine Cement Ltd. (2009) 313 ITR (St) 1 - CIT vs. Kasha Sugar Co. Ltd (2013) (356 ITR 351) (Uttarakhand HC) - CIT vs Spectrum Consultants India (P.) Ltd Vs CIT (2014) (266 CTR 241) (Kar HC) - CIT vs Nipso Polyfabriks Ltd (213 Taxman 376) (Himachal Pradesh HC) - CIT vs ANZ Information Technology (P.) Ltd (2010) (318 ITR 123) (Kar HC) - CIT vs. Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sangh Ltd. (2013) 35 taxmann.com 616 (Raj.)(HC) - Imerys Ceram…

CIT v. Vijay Shree Ltd. (356 ITR 351) — Cited in 30 Judgments | BharatTax