CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (2014) 366 ITR 170 (Guj.) (iii) CIT v. South India Corporation Ltd.

242 ITR 114High Court2000#366 most cited

What is CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (2014) 366 ITR 170 (Guj.) (iii) CIT v. South India Corporation Ltd. authority for?

Employee contributions to welfare funds, such as provident fund or ESI, are deductible under section 36(1)(va) of the Income-tax Act if paid before the due date for filing the return of income, even if paid after the due date specified in the respective welfare fund statute.

238

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2023.

Also referred to as

CIT v. South India Corporation Ltd. · 242 ITR 114 · Section 36(1)(va) · Section 43B · employee contribution deduction · provident fund · ESI · payment due date · return filing date · welfare fund

Issues it is cited on

section 36(1)(va)section 43bsection 36(1)section 43section 36india

Judgments citing CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (2014) 366 ITR 170 (Guj.) (iii) CIT v. South India Corporation Ltd.

Swarup Ram, Jodhpur vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Jodhpur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 66/JODH/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur24 Sept 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N.K.Saini & Shri Sandeep Gosain

For Appellant: Shri Akash Phophalia, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha, JCIT DR
Section 139Section 2Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JODHPUR BENCHES, JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI N.K.SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 65 & 66/Jodh/2021 Assessment Years : 2018-19 & 2019-20 Sawrup Ram Vs. The ITO, 14, Janiyon Ki Dhani Ward 1(1), Basani Nikuba, Jodhpur Jodhpur PAN NO: ASXPR1455R Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Akash Phophalia, CA Revenue by : Smt. Monisha, JCIT DR Date of Hearing : 28.09.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 28.09.2021 आदेश/Order PER N.K. SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT Both the appeals by the assessee are directed against the separate orders of the CIT(App…

Swarup Ram, Jodhpur vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Jodhpur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 65/JODH/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur24 Sept 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N.K.Saini & Shri Sandeep Gosain

For Appellant: Shri Akash Phophalia, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha, JCIT DR
Section 139Section 2Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JODHPUR BENCHES, JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI N.K.SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 65 & 66/Jodh/2021 Assessment Years : 2018-19 & 2019-20 Sawrup Ram Vs. The ITO, 14, Janiyon Ki Dhani Ward 1(1), Basani Nikuba, Jodhpur Jodhpur PAN NO: ASXPR1455R Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Akash Phophalia, CA Revenue by : Smt. Monisha, JCIT DR Date of Hearing : 28.09.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 28.09.2021 आदेश/Order PER N.K. SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT Both the appeals by the assessee are directed against the separate orders of the CIT(App…

Inder Bahadur Gurung, Jodhpur vs. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, ITO, W-3(2), Ju

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

ITA 55/JODH/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur24 Sept 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N.K.Saini & Shri Sandeep Gosainassessment Year : 2018-19 Mohan Ram Chaudhary, Vs. The Ito, Jodhpur Ward 3(2), Jodhpur Pan No: Acgpc8070L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Kapil Taparia & Miss Divya, Cas. Revenue By : Smt. Monisha, Jcit Dr Assessment Year : 2018-19 Muthia Muruganantham, Vs. The Ito, Jodhpur Ward 3(2), Jodhpur Pan No: Abipm1535F Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Kapil Taparia & Miss Divya, Cas. Revenue By : Smt. Monisha, Jcit Dr Assessment Year : 2018-19 Inder Bahadur Gurung, Vs. The Ito, Jodhpur Ward 3(1), Jodhpur Pan No: Aempg9230N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Kapil Taparia & Miss Divya, Cas. Revenue By : Smt. Monisha, Jcit Dr

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Taparia and Miss Divya, CAsFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha, JCIT DR
Section 2Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JODHPUR BENCHES, JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI N.K.SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2018-19 Mohan Ram Chaudhary, Vs. The ITO, Jodhpur Ward 3(2), Jodhpur PAN NO: ACGPC8070L Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Kapil Taparia and Miss Divya, CAs. Revenue by : Smt. Monisha, JCIT DR Assessment Year : 2018-19 Muthia Muruganantham, Vs. The ITO, Jodhpur Ward 3(2), Jodhpur PAN NO: ABIPM1535F Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Kapil Taparia and Miss Divya, CAs. Revenue by : Smt. Monisha, JCIT DR Assessment Year : 2018-19 In…

Muthia Muruganantham, Jodhpur vs. Jurisdicational Assessing Officer, ITO Ward-3(1), Jodhpur

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

ITA 54/JODH/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur24 Sept 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N.K.Saini & Shri Sandeep Gosainassessment Year : 2018-19 Mohan Ram Chaudhary, Vs. The Ito, Jodhpur Ward 3(2), Jodhpur Pan No: Acgpc8070L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Kapil Taparia & Miss Divya, Cas. Revenue By : Smt. Monisha, Jcit Dr Assessment Year : 2018-19 Muthia Muruganantham, Vs. The Ito, Jodhpur Ward 3(2), Jodhpur Pan No: Abipm1535F Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Kapil Taparia & Miss Divya, Cas. Revenue By : Smt. Monisha, Jcit Dr Assessment Year : 2018-19 Inder Bahadur Gurung, Vs. The Ito, Jodhpur Ward 3(1), Jodhpur Pan No: Aempg9230N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Kapil Taparia & Miss Divya, Cas. Revenue By : Smt. Monisha, Jcit Dr

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Taparia and Miss Divya, CAsFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha, JCIT DR
Section 2Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JODHPUR BENCHES, JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI N.K.SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2018-19 Mohan Ram Chaudhary, Vs. The ITO, Jodhpur Ward 3(2), Jodhpur PAN NO: ACGPC8070L Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Kapil Taparia and Miss Divya, CAs. Revenue by : Smt. Monisha, JCIT DR Assessment Year : 2018-19 Muthia Muruganantham, Vs. The ITO, Jodhpur Ward 3(2), Jodhpur PAN NO: ABIPM1535F Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Kapil Taparia and Miss Divya, CAs. Revenue by : Smt. Monisha, JCIT DR Assessment Year : 2018-19 In…

Mohan Ram Chaudhary, Jodhpur vs. ITO, Ward-3(2), Jodhpur

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

ITA 51/JODH/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur24 Sept 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N.K.Saini & Shri Sandeep Gosainassessment Year : 2018-19 Mohan Ram Chaudhary, Vs. The Ito, Jodhpur Ward 3(2), Jodhpur Pan No: Acgpc8070L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Kapil Taparia & Miss Divya, Cas. Revenue By : Smt. Monisha, Jcit Dr Assessment Year : 2018-19 Muthia Muruganantham, Vs. The Ito, Jodhpur Ward 3(2), Jodhpur Pan No: Abipm1535F Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Kapil Taparia & Miss Divya, Cas. Revenue By : Smt. Monisha, Jcit Dr Assessment Year : 2018-19 Inder Bahadur Gurung, Vs. The Ito, Jodhpur Ward 3(1), Jodhpur Pan No: Aempg9230N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Kapil Taparia & Miss Divya, Cas. Revenue By : Smt. Monisha, Jcit Dr

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Taparia and Miss Divya, CAsFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha, JCIT DR
Section 2Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JODHPUR BENCHES, JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI N.K.SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2018-19 Mohan Ram Chaudhary, Vs. The ITO, Jodhpur Ward 3(2), Jodhpur PAN NO: ACGPC8070L Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Kapil Taparia and Miss Divya, CAs. Revenue by : Smt. Monisha, JCIT DR Assessment Year : 2018-19 Muthia Muruganantham, Vs. The ITO, Jodhpur Ward 3(2), Jodhpur PAN NO: ABIPM1535F Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Kapil Taparia and Miss Divya, CAs. Revenue by : Smt. Monisha, JCIT DR Assessment Year : 2018-19 In…

Indian Geotechnical Services, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 61(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 622/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Aug 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Vijay Pal Rao

For Appellant: Shri Brij Kishor Anand, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Anima Barnwal, Sr.D.R

…lliamson (Assam) Ltd: (2006) 284 ITR 619 (Gauhati) dealt with the very same issue. In the said judgment the Division Bench of the Gauhati High Court noted a contrary view taken by the Kerala High Court in the case of CIT v. South India Corporation Ltd: (2000) 242 ITR 114. After noting the said judgment the fact that the amendments had been made to the provisions of Section 43B of the Act by virtue of Finance Act, 2003 w.e.f 1.4.2004 it agreed with the submission of the learned counsel for the assessee that by virtue of the omission of the second proviso and the omission of Clauses (a), (c), (d), (e) and (f) witho…

DCIT, Circle-II, Allahabad vs. Bharat Pumps & Compressors Ltd, Allahabad

In the result, appeal filed by Revenue for ay: 2007-08 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 148/ALLD/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad12 Aug 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Ms. Tanu Singhal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Shantanu Dhamija, CIT (DR)
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(va)

…George Williamson (Assam) Ltd. [2006] 284 ITR 619 dealt with the very same issue. In the said judgment the Division Bench of the Gauhati High Court noted a contrary view taken by the Kerala High Court in the case of CIT v. South India Corporation Ltd. [2000] 242 ITR 114. After noting the said judgment the fact that the amendments had been made to the provisions of section 43B of the Act by virtue of Finance Act, 2003 with effect from 1-4-2004 it agreed with the submission of the learned counsel for the assessee that by virtue of the omission of the second proviso and the omission of clauses (a), (c), (d), (e) an…

DCIT, Circle-II, Allahabad vs. Bharat Pumps & Compressors Ltd, Allahabad

In the result, appeal filed by Revenue for ay: 2007-08 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 147/ALLD/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad12 Aug 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Ms. Tanu Singhal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Shantanu Dhamija, CIT (DR)
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(va)

…George Williamson (Assam) Ltd. [2006] 284 ITR 619 dealt with the very same issue. In the said judgment the Division Bench of the Gauhati High Court noted a contrary view taken by the Kerala High Court in the case of CIT v. South India Corporation Ltd. [2000] 242 ITR 114. After noting the said judgment the fact that the amendments had been made to the provisions of section 43B of the Act by virtue of Finance Act, 2003 with effect from 1-4-2004 it agreed with the submission of the learned counsel for the assessee that by virtue of the omission of the second proviso and the omission of clauses (a), (c), (d), (e) an…

Srinivasa Fashins Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. ITO Corporate Ward-6(4), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1396/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Sept 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Duvvuru R.L.Reddy)नधा+रण वष+ /Assessment Year: 2014-15 Heard Through Video Conferencing V. M/S.Srinivasa Fashions Pvt. Ltd., The Income Tax Officer, No.57G, Sidco Industrial Estate, Corporate Ward-6(4), Ambattur, Chennai. Chennai-600 098. [Pan: Aaics 9511 R] (अपीलाथ./Appellant) (/0यथ./Respondent) : अपीलाथ. क1 ओर से/ Appellant By Mr.N.Vijay Kumar, Ca : Mr.Ar.V.Sreenivasan, Jcit /0यथ. क1 ओर से /Respondent By : 28.09.2020 सुनवाई क1 तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 28.09.2020 घोषणा क1 तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar:

For Respondent: 28.09.2020
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 68

…George Williamson (Assam) Ltd. [2006] 284 ITR 619 dealt with the very same issue. In the said judgment the Division Bench of the Gauhati High Court noted a contrary view taken by the Kerala High Court in the case of CIT v. South India Corporation Ltd. [2000] 242 ITR 114. After noting the said judgment the fact that the amendments had been made to the provisions of section 43B of the Act by virtue of Finance Act, 2003 with effect from 1-4-2004 it agreed with the submission of the learned counsel for the assessee that by virtue of the omission of the second proviso and the omission of clauses (a), (c), (d ), (e) a…

DCIT Corporate Circle 5(1), Chennai vs. Repco Home Finance P Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA no

ITA 2885/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jun 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: JCITFor Respondent: Shri M. Viswanathan, C.A
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 36(1)(viii)

…George Williamson (Assam) Ltd. [2006] 284 ITR 619 dealt with the very same issue. In the said judgment the Division Bench of the Gauhati High Court noted a contrary view taken by the Kerala High Court in the case of CIT v. South India Corporation Ltd. [2000] 242 ITR 114. After noting the said judgment the fact that the amendments had been made to the provisions of section 43B of the Act by virtue of Finance Act, 2003 with effect from 1-4-2004 it agreed with the submission of the learned counsel for the assessee that by virtue of the omission of the second proviso and the omission of clauses (a), (c), (d ), (e) a…

Shri Purshottam B. Pitroda, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Circle-12, Ahmedabad

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 567/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri A. C. Shah & Bhaumil K. Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ranjan Kumar Singh, Sr.D. R
Section 143(3)Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)

…ed Act. In this particular case, the assessee has failed to credit the same within the stipulated time and in that view of the matter considering the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the matter of CIT-vs- South India Corporation Ltd. [2000] 242 ITR 114 (Kerala) as well as the judgment pronounced by the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of GSRTC (supra), the revenue has disallowed the amount of Employees Contribution of ESI & PF to the tune of Rs.1,89,774/- and added back to the total income of the assessee. We find no infirmity in such order passed by the authorities below hence assessee’s…

Shri Purshottam B. Pitroda, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Circle-12, Ahmedabad

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 566/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 May 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri A. C. Shah & Bhaumil K. Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ranjan Kumar Singh, Sr.D. R
Section 143(3)Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)

…ed Act. In this particular case, the assessee has failed to credit the same within the stipulated time and in that view of the matter considering the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the matter of CIT-vs- South India Corporation Ltd. [2000] 242 ITR 114 (Kerala) as well as the judgment pronounced by the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of GSRTC (supra), the revenue has disallowed the amount of Employees Contribution of ESI & PF to the tune of Rs.1,89,774/- and added back to the total income of the assessee. We find no infirmity in such order passed by the authorities below hence assessee’s…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Dewan Sugar Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5784/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2008-09 Dcit, Vs. M/S. Dewan Sugar Ltd., Circle-10(1), New Delhi Surya Plaza, 1St Floor, K- 185, Sarai Jullena, New Friends Colony, New Delhi Pan :Aaacd3465H (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)Section 36

…006) 284 ITR 619 (Gau) dealt with the very same issue. In the said judgment the Division Bench of the Gauhati High Court noted a contrary view taken by the Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs. South India Corporation Ltd. (1999) 157 CTR (Ker) 422 : (2000) 242 ITR 114 (Ker). After noting the said judgment the fact that the amendments had been made to the provisions of s. 43B of the Act by virtue of Finance Act, 2003 w.e.f 1st April, 2004 it agreed with the submission of the learned counsel for the assessee that by virtue of the omission of the second proviso and the omission of cls. (a), (c), (d), (e) and (f)…

Brijbasi Art Press Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6165/DEL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Oct 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukla & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2011-12 Vs. Dcit, Circle-3(1), New Delhi M/S. Brijbasi Art Press Ltd., E- 46/11, Okhla Indl. Area, Phase- Ii, New Delhi Pan :Aaacb0044L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 36Section 36(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 36(1)(vi)Section 43B

…006) 284 ITR 619 (Gau) dealt with the very same issue. In the said judgment the Division Bench of the Gauhati High Court noted a contrary view taken by the Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs. South India Corporation Ltd. (1999) 157 CTR (Ker) 422 : (2000) 242 ITR 114 (Ker). After noting the said judgment the fact that the amendments had been made to the provisions of s. 43B of the Act by virtue of Finance Act, 2003 w.e.f 1st April, 2004 it agreed with the submission of the learned counsel for the assessee that by virtue of the omission of the second proviso and the omission of cls. (a), (c), (d), (e) and (f)…

M/S Ac Cargo Management P.Ltd, Cochin vs. The ITO, Cochin

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

ITA 320/COCH/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Mar 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri George George. K.] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 320/Coch/2013. िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2007-2008. Vs. M/S. Ac Cargo Management The Income Tax Officer, Pvt. Ltd, Ward 1(1) 1St Floor, Chacko Chambers, Kochi Civil Lines Road, Palarivattom, Kochi 682 025. [Pan Aaeca 2206K] (अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/Appellant) अपीलाथ" (ू"यथ" ू"यथ" ू"यथ"/Respondent) ू"यथ"

For Appellant: Shri. R. Krishnan, C.A
Section 194Section 194CSection 194ISection 40

…ssee had remitted such amounts before due date of filing of return and it was allowable. 11. Per contra, ld. Departmental Representative submitted that by virtue of judgment of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. South India Corporation 242 ITR 114 employees contribution to ESI/PF remitted after due date could not be allowed u/s. 43B of the Act. 12. We have considered the rival contentions and perused the orders of the authorities below. In our opinion employees contribution which was not remitted within the due date under ESI or PF Act was rightly disallowed by the lower authorities. J…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. AIMIL Limited

ITA-1063/2006HC Delhi23 Dec 2009
Section 154Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…mson (Assam) Ltd: (2006) 284 ITR 619 (Gauhati) dealt with the very same issue. In the said judgment the Division Bench of the Gauhati High Court noted a contrary view taken by the Kerala High Court in the case of CIT v. South India Corporation Ltd: (2000) 242 ITR 114. After noting the said judgment the fact that the amendments had been made to the provisions of Section 43B of the Act by virtue of Finance Act, 2003 w.e.f 1.4.2004 it agreed with the submission of the learned counsel for the assessee that by virtue of the omission of the second proviso and the omission of Clauses (a), (c), (d), (e) and (f)…

Commissioner of Income Tax V vs. P.M.Electronics Ltd

ITA - 475 / 2007HC Delhi03 Nov 2008
Section 1Section 139Section 143(1)(A)Section 143(2)Section 2(24)(x)Section 260ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B

…son (Assam) Ltd: (2006) 284 ITR 619 (Gauhati) dealt with the very same issue. In the said judgment the Division Bench of the Gauhati High Court noted a contrary view taken by the Kerala High Court in the case of CIT v. South India Corporation Ltd: (2000) 242 ITR 114. After noting the said judgment the fact 2008:DHC:2959-DB ITA 475/2007 Page 5 of 8 that the amendments had been made to the provisions of Section 43B of the Act by virtue of Finance Act, 2003 w.e.f 1.4.2004 it agreed with the submission of the learned counsel for the assessee that by virtue of the omission of the second proviso and t…

The Commissioner of Income Tax-V vs. P M Electronics Ltd

ITA/475/2007HC Delhi03 Nov 2008
Section 1Section 139Section 143(1)(A)Section 143(2)Section 2(24)(x)Section 260ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B

…son (Assam) Ltd: (2006) 284 ITR 619 (Gauhati) dealt with the very same issue. In the said judgment the Division Bench of the Gauhati High Court noted a contrary view taken by the Kerala High Court in the case of CIT v. South India Corporation Ltd: (2000) 242 ITR 114. After noting the said judgment the fact 2008:DHC:2959-DB ITA 475/2007 Page 5 of 8 that the amendments had been made to the provisions of Section 43B of the Act by virtue of Finance Act, 2003 w.e.f 1.4.2004 it agreed with the submission of the learned counsel for the assessee that by virtue of the omission of the second proviso and t…