Commissioner of Income-tax v. Ishwari Khetan Sugar Mills (Pvt.) Ltd.

272 ITR 224High Court#20247 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2021.

Judgments citing Commissioner of Income-tax v. Ishwari Khetan Sugar Mills (Pvt.) Ltd.

ACIT, Circle - 2(1), Kolkata vs. Tcg Urban Infrastructure Holdings Pvt Ltd., Kolkata

Accordingly, the same is dismissed

ITA 2584/KOL/2019[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Oct 2021AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. M.L.Meenaआयकर अपील सं.य/

Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)

…P.Ltd Vs. ACIT, C­2 (1), Kol Page 18 taken by Hon'ble Supreme Court In the case of Lachmandas Mathuradas vs CIT, 254 ITR 799(SC). Similarly, the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income­tax v. Ishwari Khetan Sugar Mills (Pvt.) Ltd.,272 ITR 224(All) have held that interest on delayed payment of provident fund is an allowable deduction u/s.37(1) of the Act. Hon'ble Delhi High Court In the case of Commissioner of Income­tax v. Delhi Automobiles, 272 HR 381(Del) has held that interest payments on delayed sales tax is an allowable deduction u/s.37(l) of the Act. I ·find that the Hon'ble Jur…

M/S Inflow Technologies Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, ground Nos

ITA 3339/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Aug 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Nitish Ranjan, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Pradeep Kumar, CIT-DR

…of the Act. Same view has also been taken by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Lachmandas Mathuradas vs CIT, 254 ITR 799(sc). We also find that Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Ishwari Khetan Sugar Mills (Pvt.) Ltd.,272 ITR 224(All) have held that interest on delayed payment of provident fund is an allowable deduction u/s.37(1) of the Act. Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Delhi Automobiles, 272 ITR 381 (Del) has held that interest payments on delayed sales tax is an allowable deduction u/s.37(1) of the Act. In view of above and respe…

M/S Inflow Technologies Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, ground Nos

ITA 3338/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Aug 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Nitish Ranjan, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Pradeep Kumar, CIT-DR

…of the Act. Same view has also been taken by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Lachmandas Mathuradas vs CIT, 254 ITR 799(sc). We also find that Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Ishwari Khetan Sugar Mills (Pvt.) Ltd.,272 ITR 224(All) have held that interest on delayed payment of provident fund is an allowable deduction u/s.37(1) of the Act. Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Delhi Automobiles, 272 ITR 381 (Del) has held that interest payments on delayed sales tax is an allowable deduction u/s.37(1) of the Act. In view of above and respe…

Cineyug Worldwide, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 3(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4225/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Ram Lal Negi: A.Y : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Shubham Rathi &For Respondent: Shri Kumar Padmapani Bora
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 37Section 43B

…the following cases also, interest on late payment of statutory dues were allowed by various courts :- i) Mahalakshmi Sugar Mills Co. vs CIT, 123 ITR 429 (SC) ii) Lachmandas Mathurdas vs CIT, 254 ITR 799 (SC) iii) CIT vs Ishwari Khetan Sugar Mills Pvt. Ltd., 272 ITR 224 (All) iv) CIT vs Delhi Automobiles, 272 ITR 381 (Delhi) v) Euro RSCG Advertising (P.) Ltd. vs ACIT, (2012) 53 SOT 90 (Mumbai) vi) Chander K. Raichandani vs ACIT, ITA No. 799/Mum/2012 dated 08.02.2013 5. On the other hand, the ld. DR supported the order of the ld. CIT(A). 6. Considering the rival submissions and the material on record, we notice…